Attack on Tunisian hotel

[dowie]

Getting rid of mosques is bad idea it will only cause more segregation and hatred, their is nothing worth with mosques its place of worship and guidance we don't live in 1940 Nazi German here. What needs to be done is what morocco and many other Muslim country have implemented, a strategy aiming at inculcating to the new generations of Imams and preachers the values of moderate Islam.

Also need to block every ISIS related website/isp in order to stop people being brainwashed and radicalized.

Like you said we don't live in Nazi Germany, we shouldn't need to block ISIS websites either. Ideas should be challenged not blocked/censored.

The world needs to come together and stop training and creating these terrorists groups to fight proxy wars. Al Qaeda created by the CIA to fight the soviets, it only comes back to bit you in ares.

Also stop bombing country for geopolitics reasons and creating failed states that are destabilized the region and security, ask yourselfs where was ISIS before the Iraq war?

Al Qaeda wasn't created by the CIA, you're confusing the funding of the mujaheddin to fight the soviets with Al Qaeda which was formed in response to US troops being present in Saudi Arabia as a result of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. Granted Bin Laden fought the soviets before he formed Al Qaeda, then again so did plenty of the people who went on the form the Northern Alliance and assist with the US invasion of Afghanistan.

There is a bit more than 'geopolitical reasons' for bombing countries... in this particular region it was the massacre of civilians by Gaddafi that prompted a response... Tunisia and Libya were the subject of sporadic uprisings, sure the invasion of Iraq had a generally negative PR effect in Muslim countries and in retrospect was probably not a good thing but the destabilisation in that particular region started from within. Further to that even if we hadn't invaded Iraq it is unlikely that it would be stable at the moment - the arab spring changed things, it is very likely Iraq would be in a similar situation to Syria albeit the other way around with Shia rising up (backed by Iran) had Saddam stayed in power. That isn't to excuse the invasion of Iraq but westerners would likely still be targets regardless.

 

[SciNeT]

Yep i aagree getting rid of mosques. Firm but fair. Bet a lot of them are being used in the wrong manner

This is why it was important to scaremonger people out of visiting Tunisia in the wake of the shootings, it will force actions like these.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33297245

 

[ak22]

Like you said we don't live in Nazi Germany, we shouldn't need to block ISIS websites either. Ideas should be challenged not blocked/censored.



Al Qaeda wasn't created by the CIA, you're confusing the funding of the mujaheddin to fight the soviets with Al Qaeda which was formed in response to US troops being present in Saudi Arabia as a result of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. Granted Bin Laden fought the soviets before he formed Al Qaeda, then again so did plenty of the people who went on the form the Northern Alliance and assist with the US invasion of Afghanistan.

There is a bit more than 'geopolitical reasons' for bombing countries... in this particular region it was the massacre of civilians by Gaddafi that prompted a response... Tunisia and Libya were the subject of sporadic uprisings, sure the invasion of Iraq had a generally negative PR effect in Muslim countries and in retrospect was probably not a good thing but the destabilisation in that particular region started from within. Further to that even if we hadn't invaded Iraq it is unlikely that it would be stable at the moment - the arab spring changed things, it is very likely Iraq would be in a similar situation to Syria albeit the other way around with Shia rising up (backed by Iran) had Saddam stayed in power. That isn't to excuse the invasion of Iraq but westerners would likely still be targets regardless.

Al Qaeda was created/funded by the CIA, Pakistani intellect (ISI) & Saudi to fight the soviets what happened when the soviets left? You have bunch or maniacs well trained armed and funded. My point is stop funding these radical groups for your gain you are only adding fuel to the fire we have seen this with Al Qaeda.

We have not helped Civilians we have it made worse we bombed Libya and left it burn we had no plan what to do after didn't even send in peace keepers( so much for David Cameron "we will not forget you Libya" same goes for Iraq? why are bush Blair not facing war crimes?
You talk about Shia uprising the US destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery, and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration, Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost political influence jobs etc. I'm not blaming all the issues on US/western intervention but i plays a huge roles in creation of these terrorist factions.

 

[dowie]

Al Qaeda was created by the CIA, Pakistani intellect (ISI) and funded by Saudi to fight the soviets.

no it wasn't and that isn't what Hillary says in your clip either

did Bin Laden fight in the mujaheddin - yup

did Bin Laden form Al Qaeda - yup

clip doesn't disagree with what I've already posted and doesn't support your statement that the CIA created Al Qaeda

note members of the mujaheddin also formed parts of the Taliban and the Northern Alliance too

 

[gettothechopper]

Al Qaeda was created by the CIA, Pakistani intellect (ISI) and funded by Saudi to fight the soviets.

you are being too simplistic

we didnt even create the mujahideen

CIA gave money / weapons to > ISI who gave it to > mujahideen (who already existed as resistance to the USSR invasion) who then > had a civil war after USSR pulled out > which lead to the rise of the taliban

it was the first gulf war which peed off some of the nuttier ex-muj (due to SA letting US troops into the area) and fuelled AQ recruitment and anti west sentiment

 

[scorza]

Tunisia closing down 80 mosques which don't respect the view and laws of the country.

We should do the same in Britain, in fact every nation should do it.

Horrible human beings stuck in the stone ages

Similar to point 5 of my 5 point plan to combat Islamic extremism in the UK, though I expect the Tunisian mosques will re-open when it's all quietened down again.

1. No planning permission to be granted for any mosque with a minaret
2. Separate Muslim inmates at Her Majesty's Prisons from the rest of the population
3. Ban on face coverings in public
4. New criminal offence of operating a Sharia law court in the UK
5. Compulsory purchase for nominal (£10) fee any Mosque where evidence of radicalisation exists. Demolish the building and convert to a public place.

 

[Danthus]

A Mosque without a Minaret is OK though?

 

[Arazi]

Maybe i am being dumb here but what is it with the word Moderate when describing Muslims, why are they not described as just Muslim, i hear it everywhere, TV\News\Documentaries\Forums\Websites etc etc.

I don't recall hearing of a moderate Catholic\Hindu or a moderate Buddhist etc, even if there has been acts of terror and violence committed by people with these respective religious beliefs, i have still never heard of law abiding people who believe in whatever religion they choose to believe in being called a moderate, apart from Muslims.

Surely you can only be either A: A Muslim or B: A Muslim who is sympathetic to the likes of Al Qaeda, I.S etc and\or go as far as committing terrorism and the acts of violence and hate that they preach.

So, what i would like to see or hear is are you either A or are you B?

If you are A, you need to make your voices heard everywhere, and BE the news headlines rather than the headlines being about the scum that option B produce.

 

[scorza]

A Mosque without a Minaret is OK though?

As long as it's not causing a problem, why wouldn't it be OK?

 

[Danthus]

As long as it's not causing a problem, why wouldn't it be OK?

I don't see the significance of a Minaret.

 

[Hitman_Leon]

There is one fact that hinders considerably the spread of these fundamentalists and helps tie up a greater amount of their resources than any effort they put into attacking the west. This is their dedication to infantile sectarianism, tribal loyalties, blood feuds and inherent predisposition to loyalty based on the highest bidder.

There is always discussion about how stupid and plain evil the things they do are. We can count one area of their stupidity as a blessing rather than a curse because this prevents to a degree the unification of all these fundamentalist groups into one united enemy which would be rather a different and possibly more destructive foe.

 

[n111ck]

We can count one area of their stupidity as a blessing rather than a curse because this prevents to a degree the unification of all these fundamentalist groups into one united enemy which would be rather a different and possibly more destructive foe.

Exactly - IS is destined to self destruct - muslims like killing each other.

 

[scorza]

I don't see the significance of a Minaret.

Minarets aren't mentioned in either the Qu'ran or the Hadiths, they were added later as an aid to subjugating a conquered area. It's a symbol of Islamic dominance simple as.

 

[Danthus]

Minarets aren't mentioned in either the Qu'ran or the Hadiths, they were added later as an aid to subjugating a conquered area. It's a symbol of Islamic dominance simple as.

That does absolutely nothing to address how people a radicalised.

 

[do_ron_ron]

Except you're not doing that. You're saying because someone else did something bad it's now ok for these people to do something bad. You are justifying their actions.
I bet if I went and shot a load of innocent Muslims you wouldn't be sat there saying 'well you know, they did kill a fair few Brits first'.

No, without a political motive you would just be another disturbed nutter.


Ask yourself, if say, Australia were invaded and bombed by outsiders how many Brits would go and join any resistance.

 

[do_ron_ron]

This has been going on before oil was even discovered...

I did say "the US and UK's empire building", so by default that was before the importance of oil.

 

[do_ron_ron]

There is a bit more than 'geopolitical reasons' for bombing countries... in this particular region it was the massacre of civilians by Gaddafi that prompted a response... Tunisia and Libya were the subject of sporadic uprisings, sure the invasion of Iraq had a generally negative PR effect in Muslim countries and in retrospect was probably not a good thing but the destabilisation in that particular region started from within. Further to that even if we hadn't invaded Iraq it is unlikely that it would be stable at the moment - the arab spring changed things, it is very likely Iraq would be in a similar situation to Syria albeit the other way around with Shia rising up (backed by Iran) had Saddam stayed in power. That isn't to excuse the invasion of Iraq but westerners would likely still be targets regardless.

I really wonder about the 'Arab Spring'. Granted, Tunisia due to it's unpopular leader was another overthrow as seen often. The hype may have spread to it's neighbour Libya but beyond that I have the feeling of 'staged' uprisings to suit outside interests. Gaddafi would have survived without our special forces, planes and ships of the coast. We caused the current failed state. Why? Especially after Blair was cosying up to Gaddafi for oil contracts. Egypt was not expected by the US backed military puppets. Saddam would have survived in Iraq, he has already put down uprisings. How many Westerners were targets before our meddling in Afghanistan and Iraq?

 

[Rroff]

How many Westerners were targets before our meddling in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Our meddling there goes back a long long time - everything that happened in the 1990/1 and 2003 wars has happened before (1920s) and will likely happen again we've been meddling in the government and administration of Iraq for atleast 300 years.

EDIT: Events in the middle east are certainly far more than about Muslims and/or the west, there is a whole lot of proxy action going on there - some of the whole "arab spring" thing was a demonstration of the subversive control/influence certain countries are able to wield - you (in general) might be surprised at who some of the real players are (nationally) behind the scenes. (its a complex subject waay beyond the scope of a post here).

 

[scorza]

That does absolutely nothing to address how people a radicalised.

It sends a message. You think the only way to address how people are radicalised is to give in and do what they want - pull out of middle-east, let politics take its natural course without any western stakes etc. Let me tell you now, that's not going to solve the problem at all, it'll just make it worse because it'll further re-inforce their point that they are strong and we are weak.

 

[Danthus]

It sends a awful message, one which some will exploit.