Shootings and explosion in Paris!

[Thunder Bolt]

I didn't call him a hero, but he could have let the bomber in regardless, if his sympathies were with the cause that IS seem to stand for.

 

[Simster]

If it was irrelevant then we wouldn't be talking about it.

In your opinion, how is the security guard's religion relevant?

 

[Lush]

Not sure if this article has been mentioned yet, but it gives a real insight into the aspirations of ISIS and explains why knee jerk reactions based on half truths aren't the way forward. Scary times.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

 

[Soulman]

He saved the lives of a whole lot of people, I don't care if he was just doing his job or what religion he was, the bloke should be recognised for that.

Hero may be to strong a word for it but i don't think it follows that someone 'just doing a job' cannot be one. Soldiers, police, firemen, nurses and a whole other range of occupations can do heroic things in the course of their employment.

You really do state the obvious don't you, whilst trying to put things into a post. The security fellow was doing routine checks same as others do like at the Amex, one unknown to him had a bomb, it detonated and thankfully he was not hurt and others were saved because it detonated. The police firefighters and nurses that you brought into the debate know they will have to saves lives and are heroes many times in their lives, you chose to try and dismiss/demean my post by bringing these examples in, even though it was a poor comparison.

 

[BadFish]

In your opinion, how is the security guard's religion relevant?

Because it demonstrates that this is not about Islam against the world. I think that IS want this to be about Islam V the west and the west V Islam they want to draw up the battle lines and drive a wedge through communities. The fact that the chap that stopped the bomber killing many more is a muslim shows that the line between the two sides is not where ISIS want it to be it is still where we want it.

 

[scamander]

Not sure if this article has been mentioned yet, but it gives a real insight into the aspirations of ISIS and explains why knee jerk reactions based on half truths aren't the way forward. Scary times.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

I posted a link to the same article a few pages back, I agree that it's a very comprehensive article and well worth reading.

 

[BigGully]

I didn't call him a hero, but he could have let the bomber in regardless, if his sympathies were with the cause that IS seem to stand for.

You were just using a set of assumptions to qualify your own view that not all Muslims are sympathises etc etc.

It should be pretty plain that we all know that !!!!

 

[Simster]

Not sure if this article has been mentioned yet, but it gives a real insight into the aspirations of ISIS and explains why knee jerk reactions based on half truths aren't the way forward. Scary times.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It has (this morning I think), and it is an excellent read.

 

[BadFish]

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...-calls-them-weak/story-fn948wjf-1227611388541

Waleed Aly on the weakness of ISIS. Not sure if this will work in the UK but it is an interesting point of view.

 

[BigGully]

Not sure if this article has been mentioned yet, but it gives a real insight into the aspirations of ISIS and explains why knee jerk reactions based on half truths aren't the way forward. Scary times.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

I didnt read it (yet), and I am sure it is worth a read, but it will only include one set of ideas and interpretations from one man.

James Fallows the author is a Democrat and a Liberal so it is bound to have that slant on it, a little bit like asking Jeremy Corbyn or an associate to do the same.

I am not saying that should disqualify it, but its hardly definitive.

 

[BadFish]

You really do state the obvious don't you, whilst trying to put things into a post. The security fellow was doing routine checks same as others do like at the Amex, one unknown to him had a bomb, it detonated and thankfully he was not hurt and others were saved because it detonated. The police firefighters and nurses that you brought into the debate know they will have to saves lives and are heroes many times in their lives, you chose to try and dismiss/demean my post by bringing these examples in, even though it was a poor comparison.

I was just making a point about the argument that one cannot be heroic when 'doing their job'. To be honest i am not sure if it was you that said that or the poster before you, the first part of my post was in response to your post.

 

[Simster]

Because it demonstrates that this is not about Islam against the world. I think that IS want this to be about Islam V the west and the west V Islam they want to draw up the battle lines and drive a wedge through communities. The fact that the chap that stopped the bomber killing many more is a muslim shows that the line between the two sides is not where ISIS want it to be it is still where we want it.

So you don't think that ISIS would simply consider one muslim death as collateral damage?

I think the real problem is that most people in the west don't know why ISIS are our enemies - all of us know they are blood thirsty extremists and a threat to the public, but unlike past bloodthirsty tyrants, most of us don't know why they're waging war in this way.

We really don't need hand-wringers to point out isolated incidents of minorites in the west being excluded from the suffering. My heart goes out to that security guard - it must have been a shocking ordeal - but lets not derail the discussion of how this should be dealt with by pointing out minorities and saying "look, they're suffering too!". Because we know.

I didnt read it (yet), and I am sure it is worth a read, but it will only include one set of ideas and interpretations from one man.

James Fallows the author is a Democrat and a Liberal so it is bound to have that slant on it, a little bit like asking Jeremy Corbyn or an associate to do the same.

I am not saying that should disqualify it, but its hardly definitive.

It's a fairly neutral piece and very interesting. Why not read it before blustering on about the author? THEN make your mind up.

 

[Lush]

I didnt read it (yet), and I am sure it is worth a read, but it will only include one set of ideas and interpretations from one man.

James Fallows the author is a Democrat and a Liberal so it is bound to have that slant on it, a little bit like asking Jeremy Corbyn or an associate to do the same.

I am not saying that should disqualify it, but its hardly definitive.

Of course. And the great thing about living in the West is that you can read it, then decide for yourself.

 

[BigGully]

Of course. And the great thing about living in the West is that you can read it, then decide for yourself.

I do not profess to really know the dynamics of the Middle East and the tribal warfare aspects, that's more for those that have a genuine insight to those complexities.

Sometimes skilled writers (James Fallows was the speech writer for President Carter) so he knows his way around words, can articulate themselves so well that nearly anything they write can seem feasible and offer a solution.

 

[Soulman]

I was just making a point about the argument that one cannot be heroic when 'doing their job'. To be honest i am not sure if it was you that said that or the poster before you, the first part of my post was in response to your post.

I suspect there were many heroes that night, ones that knew they were in danger and not just stumbled on a chap whilst frisking him, though I notice you have not mentioned any of them. Could it just be the fact that this security guard was Muslim that you felt the need to point out this particular "hero". Again I shall make it clear I am glad this chap is alive, I am also well aware that there are decent moderate Muslims, let's face it many on here have to repeat that many times to avoid confusion and misrepresentation.

 

[Soulman]

So you don't think that ISIS would simply consider one muslim death as collateral damage?

I think the real problem is that most people in the west don't know why ISIS are our enemies - all of us know they are blood thirsty extremists and a threat to the public, but unlike past bloodthirsty tyrants, most of us don't know why they're waging war in this way.

We really don't need hand-wringers to point out isolated incidents of minorites in the west being excluded from the suffering. My heart goes out to that security guard - it must have been a shocking ordeal - but lets not derail the discussion of how this should be dealt with by pointing out minorities and saying "look, they're suffering too!". Because we know.


It's a fairly neutral piece and very interesting. Why not read it before blustering on about the author? THEN make your mind up.

Spot on.

 

[BadFish]

Of course. And the great thing about living in the West is that you can read it, then decide for yourself.

Or indeed to dismiss it without bothering.

Reading it at the moment (although very bleary eyed) and it is an interesting read. It brings up the point echoed in [MENTION=232]Simster[/MENTION] 's post that we actually know very little about the group and its intentions and wishes.

 

[BadFish]

I suspect there were many heroes that night, ones that knew they were in danger and not just stumbled on a chap whilst frisking him, though I notice you have not mentioned any of them. Could it just be the fact that this security guard was Muslim that you felt the need to point out this particular "hero". Again I shall make it clear I am glad this chap is alive, I am also well aware that there are decent moderate Muslims, let's face it many on here have to repeat that many times to avoid confusion and misrepresentation.

I did not feel the need to point out that he was a hero because he was muslim.

I neither called him a hero nor his act heroic and nor did i start the discussion about him. Of course there were many heroes that night and many people did many wonderful things. All those people should be recognised for their actions and none should be damned with the faint praise of 'just doing their job' or 'just stumbled on a chap whilst frisking him'.

 

[Lush]

I do not profess to really know the dynamics of the Middle East and the tribal warfare aspects, that's more for those that have a genuine insight to those complexities.

Sometimes skilled writers (James Fallows was the speech writer for President Carter) so he knows his way around words, can articulate themselves so well that nearly anything they write can seem feasible and offer a solution.

It's not actually about that. It's about what jihad/holy war actually means if you interpret the teachings of the Koran and the Prophet Mohammed literally, as the people behind ISIS are doing. It helps to explain a lot.

 

[mikeyjh]

I think the real problem is that most people in the west don't know why ISIS are our enemies - all of us know they are blood thirsty extremists and a threat to the public, but unlike past bloodthirsty tyrants, most of us don't know why they're waging war in this way.

We really don't need hand-wringers to point out isolated incidents of minorites in the west being excluded from the suffering. My heart goes out to that security guard - it must have been a shocking ordeal - but lets not derail the discussion of how this should be dealt with by pointing out minorities and saying "look, they're suffering too!". Because we know.

I think there's a contradiction in your post - Taking your first comment, I think you're right, we haven't figured out why we are the targets of ISIS et al, we guess, we ponder but we don't know. But then you go on to say that if we want to to discuss the suffering of muslim people, we are 'hand wringers' - There within is the problem with much of this discussion, any attempt to try and understand why the belligerents may be so inclined is met with bluster and expressions like 'hand wringers' and apologists. Everyone has to recognise that if we don't understand the problem, how do we arrive at a solution?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting there's an easy answer but a) Pretty obvious bombing doesn't work, we've been doing it for 14 years now, and b) To find the answer, we have to understand the question....