London Bridge Incident
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
I wonder if the same thought would have worked against the Nazis?
It's something many people have been saying for years but money talks and as long as they can make money, the media won't be changing their approach.
Apart from all the ones who haven't. You can't have failed to notice that some immigration has occured in the last 20 years. Quite a lot of immigration, actually. There has also been a huge increase in the amount of communication worldwide, thanks to the big growth in the internet. So there's a lot more access to dramatic, compelling messages of an Islam that provides identity and purpose, simplicity and purity, a clear and evil enemy and a clear and righteous holy war against them. There has been a huge increase in the number of Muslims in the UK, which brings the combination of division and power and a greater chance of encountering those messages offline as well as online.
Killing for religion has been deeply embedded in Islam since its formation and even more so after Mohammed died. No foreign policy can stop that. It's built in by design.
No, it's not. My point was to rebut the idea that the police are only interested in criminal deeds. As long as there are watch lists then clearly they should also be interested in criminal intentions and interests. This is fine, so long as the thresholds are reasonable, as you say.
If you're struggling to tell the difference between an army and a vague collection of civilians looking to cause chaos without regard for their own life, in pursuit of an idea then I can see why you might think this is easy.
Thats understandable as they have suffered really sever terrorist events, but I think we need to be very clear that if British citizens go to other countries and become killers, then they cant come back here, too dangerous.
It really wont change, hate and fear sell newspapers.
The whole world saw even back then what you are still refusing to accept. I was only a child when I heard some guy on the TV talking about how the UK and US getting involved hand-in-hand in the middle east and the oil will have to pay back in blood in couple of decades. The Russians got into that as well but they have the stomach to deal with the consequences, UK simply does not.
The British people love to call things as they are which is a great trait but usually only as long as it doesn't involve them...
Obviously our armed forces are sanctioned by the government and the public. But you knew what I was saying your just looking for opportunities to put people down.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,613
Corbyn would give them No11 as an embassy.
Frankly I don't think it's wise to let people leave the country to fight for a militia group and then return back to normal life here, it's such a complex collection of groups and allegiances to start with, and it would be really difficult to figure out which groups people fought for. If they want to go and fight in Syria and it's not as part of a British Army deployment then they can't really expect to come back. You can't just take citizenship away though and I doubt Syria are offering much in the way of citizenship at the moment, so it's definitely a tricky one.
Even if they go to fight against Isis, we dont know what kind of ideology they will develop, e.g before people went to fight isis in syria, then on tv we see the rebels eating peoples hearts.
I understand the difference, the issue is it has to be crushed now before it gets any bigger.
This decapitating death cult that is spreading across Syria and Iraq and you would sit idle?
Scary thought.
Where do you send them, given, you know, they're often British citizens?
I'd rather we did something sensible and measured that was likely to actually achieve something.