And you know this how???
You think that your average criminal would blow himself up just to avoid capture?
Explosions reported at Brussels airport.
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
And you know this how???
You think that your average criminal would blow himself up just to avoid capture?
Exactly. To suggest otherwise is left-wing, bite the hand that feeds inspired cack.
No he's saying there should be a genocide in the middle east as we can't differentiate between a terrorist and a normal person, so we might aswell get rid of all of them. Madness.
That's the problem. I'm not sayng that the post I made isn't deeply disturbing but that's what it's going to take to truly stop all of this and we'll never do it (morally, quite rightly so).
Not all Muslims are terrorists and not all terrorists are Muslim, that is a fact. However this threat from IS and their radicalisation of thousands if not millions of people poses us with the question, how do we know who is a terrorist and who isn't? The only way to deal with it is to dehumanise the entire thing and wipe out Islam (other religions too perhaps? Though if we didn't have religion to fight over we'd fight over something else instead)
I'm not saying that's anythng other than a horrible, horrible idea, but these attacks will only escalate until we do finally engage them in the war that they want to bring about the apocalypse.
You can't reason with that, you can't adapt your ways to include them because it's completely incompatible with us and our way of life. They see us as the terrorists and our way of life as terrorism. You can't give them a Caliphate because the Caliphate has to spread until it takes over otherwise it ceases being a Caliphate.
What do we do when they finally get their hands on chemical/biological/nuclear weapons and murder hundreds of thousands of people in one attack rather than just hundreds like they are doing now?
This literally addresses nothing. Who said it wasn't 'fecked'? I'll lay it out for you - it is 'fecked', the west intervened and exacerbated the situation, and then that brought unwanted attention its way.
My guess is that you don't really know what your argument is.
Which isn't going to happen. However, giving them a cause to rally behind and broaden its appeal to all of those directly affected by the west's involvement certainly helps them in their goal.
Yeah OK I skim read it the first time, I read it again and it is a bit disturbing and doesnt take into account the millions of innocent people the terrorists live amongst.
I know you're frustrated mate, it's an awful situation, but there's no way we can wipe out a religion followed by more than a billion human beings using violence.
We just have to keep on doing what we do. Maintain vigilance in counterintelligence, investigate horrors that slip through the cracks, and hope that this shit will die off in the future.
You are exactly correct.
Our human instincts are to fight for our rights, our opinions, our beliefs. These people aren't going to stop until we're wiped out. We can't talk them out of it, we can't reason with them and we can't just let them be. What do we do? It's a war we can't win unless we go to the absolute extreme and take a whole region out and forget about the collateral damage of millions of innocent lives.
It's a very Trump way to look at things and I feel absolutely ashamed of myself for thinking it but I can't see another option?
That's inaccurate, because those two aren't mutually exclusive.
In every propaganda material distributed by so-called 'IS', revenge for what 'the West' has been doing and is doing against muslims plays a big role. That's also what all those people who travelled from Western countries to 'IS', returned and got caught and interviewed by intelligence confirmed.
They go for both: Revenge and domination.
Something written so long ago it beggars belief that people still treat it seriously. The same can be said about the Bible. Religion - what a backward concept.
We take out the middle east, incite (rightful) hate in the other 700m muslims around the rest of the world. Then what do we do?
There is certainly an element to this argument but I don't think it is as clear cut as all that. When entering Britain by a Lorry, there are effectively four places someone can be caught;
So, yes migrants get through all the time... but its not a small risk. Any terrorist known to police would hopefully be picked up... somehow. God knows how.
But, the terrorists are usually home grown. During the London bombings, they were British. During the Paris attacks, they were French and Belgium. Maybe this isn't always the case, the Madrid bombings were foreign, although I think the Charlie Hebdo attackers turned out to be French too.
Could a terrorist get on a lorry from France to the UK? Yes definitely. Is it likely? Not really, they are usually home grown and terrorists tend to be risk adverse... Never say never though
Last edited:
I thought that. The only result of these attacks is to spread extremist dogma in the West. They won't defeat the West just cause more people to hate.
Surely there are more than 700 million Muslims outside the middle east? Crazy. Anyway, as the terrorists tend to be homegrown, we'd be well fecked.
Obviously football is very low on the agenda in situations like this, but the Belgium national team cancelled their practice today.
Well that's it isn't it. We can show our defiance to them by carrying on with our lives. The way we live is the way we live and nobody has a right to take that away from us but that's the way they feel as well. I just worry that it won't be long before something truly, impossibly horrible like IS getting their hands on a nuclear weapon and detonating it in a crowded city and therefore wiping out millions of people. They're more advanced than we give them credit for, especially given that they follow a branch of Islam that is quite clearly barbaric and ancient and completely out of place in modern life.
Yeah, there are actually not that many in the middle east. There's about 600m in the subcontinent, another 300m in Indonesia.
Very true.
Absolutely vital point but unfortunately this is not how the media spins it or how the electorate as a whole understands it.
Maybe that's where we differ. I don't see it as a war to be won or lost, I see it as a sickness of society that needs to be cured, because doing things the former way only keeps a horrible cycle going.
It's not really radicalisation. No offence but Islamic people have much more kids and stuff so radicalisation happens purely on numbers.
I got nothing against them, I date a Muslim girl too..I don't mean offence and purely say something I have noticed.
I got nothing against them, I date a Muslim girl too..I don't mean offence and purely say something I have noticed.
I don't deny that it is disturbing but I did take into account the millions of innocent people the terrorists live amongst, maybe you need to read it again.
They would essentially be collateral damage in such a thing. Dehumanise it completely and protecting our way of life by this manner is the only way we can stop them.
It's an utterly horrible thought. I could use the Suarez defence and say I have Muslim friends and have met many followers of Islam (which I have) that are completely well rounded, wonderful people. The IS Islam isn't even compatible with their beliefs, they see the innocent ones as failures and want to wipe them out too (in fact, they've killed more than we have). I won't defend that it's a horrible thought either but that's where it's going eventually. They want the end of days, we either give it to them or they give it to us.
Revenge is a convenient justification for them but they will carry out attacks against nations which played no role in colonialism. What they want to stop is anything that does not comply with sharia law.
Engaging in an open conflict with everything Islam would bring about world wide slaughter on an incomprehensible scale and mobilize millions upon millions of non-extremist muslims who are living among us right now. Terrorist attacks are horrifying but the death toll, both among muslims and non-muslims would be of a completely different order when we choose this route. It would basically be the single biggest catastrophy in the history of humanity.
Forgive me for rejecting that idea. To believe that is the best solution is to give up on humanity altogether. I'd like to believe these terrorist attacks are the actions of a shrinking minority who feel they are losing a battle and try to counter that by increasing the intensity of their attacks. The best thing we can do right now is encourage future generations of muslims to choose a different path. Antagonizing each and every one of them is surely not the way to achieve that.
Well in essence we're both right. It's a sickness, a cancer of society that needs to be cured. But that sickness leads to war and a war is defined by a winner and a loser otherwise it's never really ended. History repeats itself, humans don't learn from their mistakes. You're entirely right that it keeps the horrible cycle going but it immediately wipes out the IS threat until the next threat comes along.
matherto sounds like the architect of some modern day Final Solution. He keeps saying "it's a terrible thought...", but he keeps on saying it.
And how do you think those people are going to react? Do you think they're just going to sit there and do nothing? Will they be the same people after that, after seeing a shit load of innocent people wiped out for just sharing their beliefs?
The same kind of weird, circular victim blaming rationale that says Syrian civilian victims have to take some of the blame for 9/11, 7/7, Paris or any of the atrocities that "encourage" air strikes.
So, when you get in your DeLorean and reshape history for the better, you'd appease Hitler, would you? Is that what you're saying? Or perhaps just loudly blame the 'November criminals' for the horrendous, but understandable actions of the Nazis?
I'm unsure where you're going with this comparison. Every historical event is the result of cause and effect, yes. Well done you for noticing. Sadly this isn't GCSE philosophy of history, and the reality requires a good deal more action than it does sixth form pontification. These extremists need to be fought just as Hitler did, and this decades (some would say centuries) old war of back and forth is now well beyond an easy "X deserves it because X did this" hypothesis.
And this is why people shouldn't make important political decisions in the heat of the moment....or whilst drunk.
Twice through is enough thanks!
I think I would rather take regular but isolated terrorist incidents across Europe and people having to live with a certain amount of fear over exterminating an entire region. When the solution is more awful than the problem, it is no solution at all.
It would. We would be waging all out war on Islam and it's completely and utterly unfair to the millions of peaceful Muslims that live their lives either integrated in our society or just peacefully in their own. In no way am I saying it's anything other than that. It would almost certainly be a second holocaust which up until now probably was the single biggest catastrophe in the history of humanity.
I do forgive you for rejecting the idea as you are correct, it is giving up on humanity altogether. I also believe you're correct in the sense that IS have been losing territory and numbers hand over foot for a while now (or at least, that's what we're lead to believe) so they're lashing out in desperation but the idea they have will never truly go away and even if IS disbanded, a new version of it would simply replace it. IS are basically an even more extreme Al-Qaeda, so extreme that even Al-Qaeda don't like them and are fighting against them. How on earth do we stop them without basically wiping out anyone and anything that they could reasonably brainwash and take over?
Incredibly sad news, specially frightening for me as I've just came back from France on Sunday. Thoughts with those who lost their lifes and their families.
One thing though regarding my journey that's very loosely (but still) connected to what has happened. I was incredibly disappointed and actually shocked at the poor standards of security measures at Lyon's airport. Mind you, I'm not a traveller type, I've flown the plane for the first in my life but still I could draw a comparison between Polish airport in Kraków from which I've flown to France and Lyon's from which I came back to Poland.
In Kraków, during the check in you've had armed guards everywhere, those police dogs or whatever, despite not beeping when going through this metal detector gate I was still personally checked by one of the guards and then he used some thing (pardon my lack of proper nomenclature) that looked like some explosives-marker or something.
Then Lyon. No dogs, very little police/guards with military-grade hardware, poor job done at check-in, no personal checking whatsoever and the worst thing for me was that one of my friends that flew with me had some soft cheese that is regarded as a fluid (and therefore had to be better packed or disposed of) and she couldn't get past the gate. Problem is, nobody spoke bloody English. I tried to help her with my very poor French and when the woman that wouldn't let her go asked me if I spoke French, to which I replied that I do a little, she started talking to me like to a fecking native. I couldn't understand shit. Finally I got pissed off and asked her if anybody here spoke fecking English. She answered that no.
We finally understood what her problem was after some minutes of gesticulation and working with a translator/dictionary but for me it was incredibly pathetic. I mean Jesus, how are you supposed to feel safe there? I'm comparing two countries: one not even touched by terrorism and one that's a recent victim of terrorist attacks and is going to be a host of Euro 2016. France looks incredibly pale in this comparison.
Edit: Before anybody tries to jump me; yes, I'm aware that it's not completly related, perhaps it's a lot safer in Belgium and yeah, sometimes you just can't prevent those attacks but still, there seems to be a bloody lot to be done if we really are to say afterwards that everything that could have been, has been done.
One thing though regarding my journey that's very loosely (but still) connected to what has happened. I was incredibly disappointed and actually shocked at the poor standards of security measures at Lyon's airport. Mind you, I'm not a traveller type, I've flown the plane for the first in my life but still I could draw a comparison between Polish airport in Kraków from which I've flown to France and Lyon's from which I came back to Poland.
In Kraków, during the check in you've had armed guards everywhere, those police dogs or whatever, despite not beeping when going through this metal detector gate I was still personally checked by one of the guards and then he used some thing (pardon my lack of proper nomenclature) that looked like some explosives-marker or something.
Then Lyon. No dogs, very little police/guards with military-grade hardware, poor job done at check-in, no personal checking whatsoever and the worst thing for me was that one of my friends that flew with me had some soft cheese that is regarded as a fluid (and therefore had to be better packed or disposed of) and she couldn't get past the gate. Problem is, nobody spoke bloody English. I tried to help her with my very poor French and when the woman that wouldn't let her go asked me if I spoke French, to which I replied that I do a little, she started talking to me like to a fecking native. I couldn't understand shit. Finally I got pissed off and asked her if anybody here spoke fecking English. She answered that no.
We finally understood what her problem was after some minutes of gesticulation and working with a translator/dictionary but for me it was incredibly pathetic. I mean Jesus, how are you supposed to feel safe there? I'm comparing two countries: one not even touched by terrorism and one that's a recent victim of terrorist attacks and is going to be a host of Euro 2016. France looks incredibly pale in this comparison.
Edit: Before anybody tries to jump me; yes, I'm aware that it's not completly related, perhaps it's a lot safer in Belgium and yeah, sometimes you just can't prevent those attacks but still, there seems to be a bloody lot to be done if we really are to say afterwards that everything that could have been, has been done.
If some portion of society decided to kill everyone in the ME then they'd have to deal with the blowback from a lot more sections of society than just Muslims.
This might all be on the pretence of religion but for the guys of the top its still about power. Over the years im sure various groups could have acquired chemical weapons or worse, but they know if they launched an attack using them the response would be too great.
I remember someone caught in Iraq/Afghan said something similar about 911. It could have been worse but they didn't dare.
I do realise that what I've been saying does indeed sound a lot like 'the final solution' the Nazis had.
It sounds a lot like Donald Trump and his awful declarations about Muslims and what he would do if he was president.
I'm not trying to argue against Islam, or Muslims. People are free to believe and follow in whatever they want to. As said, there are many, many millions if not billions that follow the religion and don't want to blow everyone up, but some of the passages in the Quran support the idea of Sharia law and Islam ruling the world. IS knows this and they use that to radicalise some of the innocents. IS's version of Islam is completely incompatible with anything in the modern world, it's very much a similar thing to the ideology of the Nazi party. Anyone and anything that doesn't fit their version of the world will be destroyed and they want to conquer the world. They want us to attack them so they can bring about the apocalypse. How do you rationally deal with people thinking that irrationally?
I'm just offering up the end game of all of this. The worst possible outcome. These attacks will continue, and they'll escalate in scale until millions of innocent people following western religions and completely immersed in western culture (including the many Muslims around the world) are dead. So it's us or them, that simple. History repeats itself and humans repeat the same awful mistakes made in the past. The only reason we haven't had another world war is because the world would basically be nuclear wasteland by the end of it and the people in charge have the morals not to use that power to bring about a nuclear war. IS don't.
It sounds a lot like Donald Trump and his awful declarations about Muslims and what he would do if he was president.
I'm not trying to argue against Islam, or Muslims. People are free to believe and follow in whatever they want to. As said, there are many, many millions if not billions that follow the religion and don't want to blow everyone up, but some of the passages in the Quran support the idea of Sharia law and Islam ruling the world. IS knows this and they use that to radicalise some of the innocents. IS's version of Islam is completely incompatible with anything in the modern world, it's very much a similar thing to the ideology of the Nazi party. Anyone and anything that doesn't fit their version of the world will be destroyed and they want to conquer the world. They want us to attack them so they can bring about the apocalypse. How do you rationally deal with people thinking that irrationally?
I'm just offering up the end game of all of this. The worst possible outcome. These attacks will continue, and they'll escalate in scale until millions of innocent people following western religions and completely immersed in western culture (including the many Muslims around the world) are dead. So it's us or them, that simple. History repeats itself and humans repeat the same awful mistakes made in the past. The only reason we haven't had another world war is because the world would basically be nuclear wasteland by the end of it and the people in charge have the morals not to use that power to bring about a nuclear war. IS don't.
I am not sure that is accurate...do islamic people have much more kids than, say latinos?
Maybe in third world countries people have more kids in general.
PS: Quit lying Santiago, there is no way you have a girlfriend :P
My cousin works in Brussels. His wife(my sister in law) goes through Schuman for her office. They got evacuated just before the blasts, although one of their friends got injured in the blasts. They're safe thankfully.
Any chance we can keep this thread to what is going on in Belgium?
This.
We were locked in our office in Hoofddorp for 4 hours as the bomb and swat squad dealt with a suss package on a train, we are next to the station. 2 people arrested
http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/03/22/am...n-suspicious-package-trains-to-schiphol-axed/
http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/03/22/am...n-suspicious-package-trains-to-schiphol-axed/