scrubbedexpat091

I wonder if just leaving things alone in the region would help reduce these sorts of things? Seems after 15+ years bombing and military action hasn't solved anything and only created new issues.



One of the attackers apparently had been flagged for having extremist views, and one apparently entered through Greece in October.

scot47

Pulaski mentions internment. Does he suggest that the entire Muslim population of France should be interned ? And then ? Deported ? Dealt with in a "Final Solution" ?

markonline1

You've got to think that, haven't you. These people don't seem to want democracy bombed into them, so let me got on with it. Concentrate on securing our borders (and I don't mean the close them) and eradicating these people from our society seems like the way forward to me.

robin1234

I don't think interning the Japanese population of the U.S., including U.S. Citizens, played any role whatsoever in the allied victory in WWII.

Hard to see any WWII analogies. As other posts in this thread have suggested, you go to war with a state; not a terrorist organisation. Supposedly "going to war" after 9/11 was, arguably, the beginning (or at least the massive escalation) of this whole mess we're now in.

Pulaski

As far as I remember the west left the Middle East fairly well alone between 1991 (Kuwait - Gulf War I), and August 2002. ..... Clinton lobbed a volley of cruis missiles into Afghanistan in 1998, I think) That period came to an abrupt end.

civilservant

Are you suggesting we Nuke the Middle East? How do we do that without severe long term environmental damage (ie Nuclear Winter)

Trident isn't there to protect against ISIS, it's there to protect against North Korea or some other rogue nuclear nation.

Honestly, that's solve it all with a Mushroom cloud!

Goodwin's Law is back...

amideislas

Your presumption is that everyone has good intent. As you do. But in the real world, not everyone is motivated solely by "social fairness and equality for all". In fact, there are quite a few who are pretty self centered in their intent, and have little interest in whether we "work together toward a better world".

Do you believe that there aren't Russian ICBMs programmed to target all major European cities? You can rationalise that they "have a right to defend themselves", but if there were no deterrent, do you seriously believe that the likes of Putin would hesitate to use that threat in an attempt to "annex" parts of Europe? Or take it over completely?

Please. You may have the best intentions, but others do not. MAD is our best defence against that, as has been proven time after time.

Pulaski

Until we, or them muslims themselves can find a reliable way to identify radicals and preempt their attacks, then I see no other more effective plan. ..... And the common factor appears to be islam, and not ethnicity or nationality, as white/western converts have been implicated in radicization, as have western-born arabs, with Al-Awlaki being a prime example.

amideislas

So what do you suggest? Capitulation? Somehow, I wouldn't buy that even if you said so. You just aren't from that ilk.

We need to clip this bird of its wings, before it becomes completely unmanageable. "internment" won't change that. And even as you seem to suggest (re: invading afghanistan) it would likely only make it worse.

The leadership knows well what they are doing. They know very well how to create the right messages to recruit their gullible followers, they know who to target with their propaganda, and how to get to them. And the people they recruit are nothing more than expendable "soldiers" who are guaranteed some sort of paradise in their afterlife. They don't care about the fate of these people. Their brainwashing is for one purpose only.

But there are only a handful that are that skillful. There aren't zillions of them (yet).

Seems to me that a double tap to the head is a good start. Before it becomes "too big to fail".

robin1234

If it was that simple, I suspect that we'd have done this already. I'm guessing it's not that simple.

amideislas

Well, it's not all that complicated either. "The west" with it's aversion to engaging in anything resembling "war" as of late, has been pretty passive against this enemy. Obama promised "no boots on the ground", Europeans would never dream of such a thing. The UK, well, we all know the sentiments there.

But these are animals, who seem willing to stop at nothing. They conduct horrific attacks, while we wallow in our pacifism.

Fact is, if not for our unwillingness to defend ourselves (or our wishful thinking that it isn't necessary), we could have stopped this long ago. But not without engaging in things that we find deplorable. Including the collateral damage that will inevitably result. In our society, even one civilian casualty is political suicide.

Instead, we sit back and allow the enemy to conduct deplorable acts against us on both foreign soil, and our own. And all the time avoiding the inevitable. It isn't about one country or another. These people are bent on destruction without borders.

Of course it's not what we want, but how many more attacks and horrific acts are we willing to put up with? Cut them off. In short order. Or else deal with something that's far less defeatable.

robin1234

If only you were in charge! Everything would be sorted out in short order!

Hotscot

Is there room for Islam. and those who follow Islam, in secular Western democracy?

And if not...

robin1234

There are millions of good Muslim citizens in Western democracies. There does seem to be a problem with disgruntled young men who've found a mission more engrossing than the traditional petty vandalism etc., though.

amideislas

Probably. But I'd probably also be accused of "war crimes" or "genocide" for wiping them out in "short order", regardless of how much care taken to avoid damage to innocents.