Corbyn links this attack to war abroad

See the above. I never said anything about it being the sole contributor - I questioned those stating that it didn't have any impact at all. Surely you agree that the hundreds of thousands dead and millions of lives ruined at least partially contributes to the success of IS? At least partially contributed to the recruitment for 9/11?

Politicians denounce Islamic extremists all the time what planet are you on.

He is absolutely correct.

Libya is a stunning example. We went in there, bombed it , overthrew Geddafi, and allowed absolute political chaos and takfiri, millitant, terrorist groups to emerge, making it a haven for Alqaeda and ISIS [Daesh]. They produce vast terrorist links, training and indoctrination and brainwashing and a hub for further growth of their vicious ideology.

I could name country after country we have gone to 'give' democracy to.

When we are discussing terrorist attacks their causes and how to stop them then we must consider all factors.

That includes immigration and refugee policies but it also includes an assessment of our foreign policy and determining where it has harmed not helped us.

A future Conservative government could always pass legislation making it illegal to oppose or campaign against actions by British armed forces in foreign countries, or blame wars for fuelling grievances and terrorist attacks.

This legislation will apply equally to the Leader of the Opposition as it does to the average man on the street.

I think this is gonna completely end Jeremy Corbyn tbh. Firstly it will rightly be seen as cowardly and weak secondly it is not really correct. We don't know the motive of the attackers but 1/they attacked children 2/these attack have taken place all around europe in France Germany Belgium. Countries that weren't involved in foreign wars. Also we should not base our foreign policy on not wanting to upset people, British people should back our troops. The actual reality is that we have an enemy in our country who are more loyal to their faith than to this country. This won't go down well I think and we are heading for one of the worst performances a Labour government has ever had.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40053427

Yup. The west is damned by the left if it intervenes and damned if it doesn't - by the same people!

Corbyn is using the ME situation to further his long-held (and most unrealistic and naive) agenda of worldwide pacificism.

Are you being serious? :-/

These posts sum up the answer, it is an attack on our way of of life.

And that's before we hear Corbyn's explanation for why the Arab Spring would not have occurred in Tunisia before spreading and hence why after doing nothing he would not have whining in this alternative future about the fact that we have allowed Libyan's and Syrian's to be slaughtered.

Those Muslims who blame these things on our foreign policy should be arrested and deported as sympathizers.

When we discuss the causes of terrorism and how to prevent it, all factors must be considered.

That includes of course immigration and open borders policies but also failed military interventions which have created instability which allowed extremist groups to thrive.

Let's consider what reasons ISIS has for fighting us, shall we?

They are, in their order of importance:

1. We are disbelievers

2. We have secular, liberal societies that separate religion and state

3. They hate the atheists among us

4. We transgress against Islam [even though we are not Moslems, note]

5. We commit crimes against Moslems

6. We invade Moslem lands

So, our invasions are a factor, but it is at the bottom of the list of factors and they also say:

What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list. The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you. No doubt, we would stop fighting you then as we would stop fighting any disbelievers who enter into a covenant with us, but we would not stop hating you.

So, how important do you think the western democracies' foreign policy really is in terms of motivating the terrorists?

Just in case you can't make your mind up, they also say:

Furthermore, just as your disbelief is the primary reason we hate you, your disbelief is the primary reason we fight you, as we have been commanded to fight the disbelievers until they submit to the authority of Islam, either by becoming Muslims, or by paying jizyah – for those afforded this option – and living in humiliation under the rule of the Muslims.

Note the lack of a peaceful coexistence option. We must be subjugated to them and humiliated by them. And many, of us will not be afforded the jizyah humiliation option, of course.

This is a fight to the death: either western civilisation will be overcome or they will be killed. There is no other outcome.

Our foreign policy has created huge instability which has allowed such terrorist groups to grow and thrive.

There is a reasonable argument that foreign policy has contributed to instability in Iraq and Afghanistan.

However, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Mali, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia etc have all created their own instability, fomented by Islamists and other revolutionaries, and taken advantage of by regional powers like the Saudis and Iran. You cannot blame the west for the Arab Spring.

.

Lybia,

But we didn't. The Libyans overthrew Gaddafi. The UN merely protected the innocents from indiscriminate attack by enforcing (at the specific request of the Arab League) a no fly policy and by enforcing an arms embargo, including on revolutionaries.

I would favour leaving them to fight among themselves, but we have a vocal liberal minority who like to stick their oar in and save people from their own folly in the west. This humanitarian help quickly gets reconstrued and misinterpreted and used against us, often by the same people who insisted ion doing it.

The left most certainly did not insist on such wars. No point removing a horrible leader if what replaces them is more horrible.