Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generallee)
    That is already happening, whether you and I like it or not.

    French intelligence are saying that Europe and the Middle East are now essentially one theatre of war. That trucks driving into crowds mowing down pedestrians are an established tactic in the Middle East and we can expect car bombs in our cities attacking civilians soon too.

    No-one is prepared to admit this, publicly, but the post war mass immigration of Muslims into Europe has been a disaster.

    The Middle East is already a basket case. Soon we will be too. Marvellous.
    Sadly ISIS is now wining the war. Just what the hell do they want from us? They're winning huge amounts of territory in Syria from the government. I think Assad will be gone by autumn.
    Daesh is close to taking Latakia where they will have access to their own Navy ships and submarines and be able to move freely around the worlds oceans.

    Putin is scared and is pulling out Russian forces since March.

    We could stop ISIS winning, but our stupid pompous western governments refuse to help Assad. We stood back last month and watched hundreds of thousands of Assads forces annihilated by Daesh after failed attempt to liberate Tabqa. Had we helped Assad Tabqa and Raqqa may have been liberated but instead we failed them.

    Libya and Tunisia are slowly being taken over by ISIS.

    More Jihadists from Czech Republic and Afghanistan etc are flooding into Syria and Iraq. Turkey is letting then through because Turkey wants them to attack the Kurds.

    Meanwhile we chose to leave the EU so we are totally on our own without the protection of our European friends who are now our enemies no thanks to Boris Johnson, May and Damien Green.

    Just what the hell can little England do on its own????
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    And how do we know which of these motivations it was (if any)? Are we just speculating, or do we actually know?
    we know the motives based on fact and logic (unless we are playing the apologist pedant that is) are suggesting you will never be able to confirm the motives of any terrorist ( or criminal for that matter unless youve beat it out of them in confession?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    we know the motives based on fact and logic (unless we are playing the apologist pedant that is) are suggesting you will never be able to confirm the motives of any terrorist ( or criminal for that matter unless youve beat it out of them in confession?
    Of course I'm not suggesting that.*I just want to hear the facts and logic that confirm his motives, that's all.

    What are the facts that we know for sure about this incident? What logic have you used to deduce the attackers motives from these facts?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Of course I'm not suggesting that.*I just want to hear the facts and logic that confirm his motives, that's all.

    What are the facts that we know for sure about this incident? What logic have you used to deduce the attackers motives from these facts?
    before i head down your road of pedantry , let me first ask you do you think you have a better theory of motive - please advise backed with evidence.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    Meanwhile we chose to leave the EU so we are totally on our own without the protection of our European friends who are now our enemies no thanks to Boris Johnson, May and Damien Green.

    Just what the hell can little England do on its own????
    Not a very convincing attempt to twist this into the Remain narrative.

    France is still part of the European Union. What good is that doing them from a terrorist point of view? How are their "European friends" helping them?

    We will still maintain close security co-operation with our European friends after Brexit as it goes. Not that it seems to be much use against lone wolf attacks such as this.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Going by the definition you've provided, yes, it is (assuming it is illegal violence rather than ordinary warfare).

    So what I'm asking here is, what agenda or ideology or interpretation of Islam was this attack intended to promote?*
    You are asking the wrong person. I have not claimed that the Nice attack was Islamic terrorism, only that current information suggests that it could be.

    However, if it turns out that it was, I would guess it would be the particular idological agenda that the perpetrator supported, which remains to be seen.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    before i head down your road of pedantry , let me first ask you do you think you have a better theory of motive - please advise backed with evidence.
    No, I don't have any theories of the attacker's motives. So far I haven't seen any evidence that confirms any particular set of motives, but I'm open to being convinced.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I said that based on the following definition:

    The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives"
    I can agree with that. However, that is not what your previous definition was. You are using "based on" very loosely. You should have just used that definition.

    "Intimidate a segment of the civilian population in furtherance of socio/political objectives", is pretty much exactly what I said.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    No, I don't have any theories of the attacker's motives. So far I haven't seen any evidence that confirms any particular set of motives, but I'm open to being convinced.
    the facts that mohammed the muslim, jumps into a hired truck ( full of guns) and chants islamic slogan while driving into a crowd of innocent people - do not suggest any links or simialrities to other confirmed islamist attacks? its quite easy to see why you have the reputation for pedantry. im sure if your were the lawyer defending this guy youd claim he jsut took a wrong turn. or youd want to led down the path of this guy being 'a crazy nutcase' ( which may also be the case btw, as weve seen many ppl susceptible to islamist dogma are actually deranged individuals in their own right) We get in to the realm of a past discussion i had with you where the killer was a nutcase becuase he was influenced by islamists - or an islamist who was infleunced to nutcase actions.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    Meanwhile we chose to leave the EU so we are totally on our own without the protection of our European friends who are now our enemies
    That is a preposterous thing to say. Firstly, our EU partners are not our enemies; most of them are allied with us in NATO. Secondly, explain exactly how being in the EU protected the people of Nice and Paris?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Balanced, reasonable and quiet discussion. Respect.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    As I said, I am not denying anything, I'm just asking you to justify it. I will be happy to accept that it is a terrorist attack as soon as someone explains what sociopolitical agenda he thought he was fighting for.
    Like I said you are in denial about this. So it is pointless to try and
    persuade you with facts. You will never accept the truth.

    But for others on this thread who may naively be persuaded by your propaganda I'll point out that the Islamic State has been encouraging the use of motor vehicles by Muslims as weapons against civilians in France.

    http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/isis-i...-crowd-weapon/

    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    So far we've established that he's a Muslim, fine.
    Hard to deny since he was called Mohammed.

    We haven't established whether YOU are a Muslim however. Are you?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    the facts that mohammed the muslim, jumps into a hired truck ( full of guns) and chants islamic slogan while driving into a crowd of innocent people - do not suggest any links or simialrities to other confirmed islamist attacks?*its quite easy to see why you have the reputation for pedantry. im sure if your were the lawyer defending this guy youd claim he jsut took a wrong turn. or youd want to led down the path of this guy being 'a crazy nutcase' ( which may also be the case btw, as weve seen many ppl susceptible to islamist dogma are actually deranged individuals in their own right) We get in to the realm of a past discussion i had with you where the killer was a nutcase becuase he was influenced by islamists - or an islamist who was infleunced to nutcase actions.
    I'm really just looking for your response to be set out in a clear and logical format so I can follow your thoughts on the matter precisely rather than vaguely, and to have your full argument in front of me rather than having to guess or infer for myself what it might be.

    You mention the person may have been a "crazy nutcase". Do we have reason to believe he was mentally ill?*You also mention that this attack has similar features to other confirmed terrorist attacks. Is it mainly the phrase "Allahu Akbar" that you think confirms his motives?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    You are asking the wrong person. I have not claimed that the Nice attack was Islamic terrorism, only that current information suggests that it could be.

    However, if it turns out that it was, I would guess it would be the particular idological agenda that the perpetrator supported, which remains to be seen.
    I think I'm saying pretty much the same thing as you.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I'm really just looking for your response to be set out in a clear and logical format so I can follow your thoughts on the matter precisely rather than vaguely, and to have your full argument in front of me rather than having to guess or infer for myself what it might be.

    You mention the person may have been a "crazy nutcase". Do we have reason to believe he was mentally ill?*You also mention that this attack has similar features to other confirmed terrorist attacks. Is it mainly the phrase "Allahu Akbar" that you think confirms his motives?
    is there another reason you can think of to chant islamically while killing someone?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generallee)
    Like I said you are in denial about this. So it is pointless to try and persuade you with facts. You will never accept the truth.
    I've said many times, yes it could be Islamic terrorism. I will accept that it definitely is as soon as someone explains what the motives were.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    as someone
    Who?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    is there another reason you can think of to chant islamically while killing someone?
    Yes; as I've said earlier on this thread "Allahu Akbar" is a phrase that Muslims say when they do pretty much anything.

    Most Muslims pronounce the name of Allah when they know they're about to die, for example.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Who?
    Anybody. As long as there's evidence for the motive I'll believe it, it doesn't matter who tells me about it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I've said many times, yes it could be Islamic terrorism. I will accept that it definitely is as soon as someone explains what the motives were.
    We can tell you the motives (such as they) were, but my point is that you will never accept them.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...s-9749512.html

    "Abu Mohammed al Adnani urged the group’s supporters: “If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way, however it may be,” he said."

    “Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him.”

    Why won't you admit that you are a Muslim by the way? Despite being asked three times now.

    Are you ashamed of it?
 
 
 
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.