Because otherwise we forget that many Muslims are just getting on with their lives and lump everyone in together.

If we interned all Muslims, then that would send a very poor message to Muslims fighting IS.

I know we do have a fifth columnist mindset of varying degress amongst a number of Muslims. I'm not sure what can be done about that.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Blimey...So,you think 90% of "British Jews" support Israel in a way that equates to supporting ISIS and/or the 7/7 bombings in London? You often post some pretty sensible stuff IMO, but perhaps even the "right on" can exhibit inappropriate knee jerk prejudice on occasion......

I don't generally agree with a shoot to kill policy in any situation either, except where the situation is conflict based. Its never worked in the past, it won't work in the future. You may have to shoot, but the problem of a 'shoot to kill' policy is that 95% of the time you don't actually know with any certainity who is and who is not a terrorist, and even when you do, capture represents a better source of intelligence than death.

Certainly in a situation where they're engaged in an operation and lives are actually in danger, or you've established the individual is engaged in terrorist activities beyond reasonable doubt, and capture is not possible.

But as an operating procedure, its always backfired and blown up in the face of the state.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

All the eyewitnesses said he was shot without warning on the train itself and they thought the gunmen were actually the terrorists as they hadn't identified themselves as police and ended up shouting amongst themselves.

A right Royal fvck up, in short.

The police's version of events is different, surprisingly.

Edited by Kermit8 (18 Nov 2015 9.49am)

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Clearly it was a b@lls up, but I don't blame the shooter(s) in any way whatsoever. The error(s) were (in my opinion):
1. wrongly identifying the man as the missing bomber
2. letting him get as far as the train

Once told that the man was the one they were looking for, and once he was on a train, blowing his brains out was absolutely the right course of action (to prevent imminent further loss of life), but they could/should have taken him out before he got into a confined space (they could perhaps have arrested him then, or worst case taken him out without risk to bystanders should he actually be carrying explosives).

Suicide bombers are a different breed - they have no fear of death, and indeed embrace it, so identifying yourself before shooting merely gives them the chance to detonate their devices

Going back to the 13%, that's not actually as bad as it looks. Back in the 70s, 25% of young Germans polled said they would shelter or support members of the Baader-Meinhoff gang.

A key point to remember, which you also touch on, is that Daesh are a subsect, of a subsect of a subset of Sunni Islam, who are diametrically opposed to most of the Islamic community outside their own sect, and kill far more Muslims on a daily basis, than they've killed westerners.

Since we began bombing IS, we effectively entered into a war with them, and it will be unavoidable that this will result in consequences from our enemy and a fifth column at home (as every war ever has done), and that ultimately some of these individuals will be successful. All we can do is try to locate them, subvert them or eliminate them, ideally before they can cause harm, and in a manner that doesn't generate further 'martyrs'.

More importantly, we as a society also need to identify what appeal IS has to young Muslims, and counter that.

Internment was a total disaster in Ireland, it effectively alienated Catholic communities, and drove them towards republicanism and ultimately created an environment in which the Provos and Stickies could establish a safe command structure, and recruit people who had been interned without real cause. Like you, I see internment as a bad plan, because you either create a PR disaster like Gitmo bay, that serves to recruit generations of enemies, or provide a safe place where terror suspects can meet and communicate and share information and tactics (the founders of ISIS were largely put togeather in the Iraqi prison systems).

Also, in preventing attacks, we need people from the Muslim communities, more than anything else. The Intelligence services need agents, handlers and assets who speak languages, know dialects, can move freely in targeted mosques and community groups etc - and the best approach is to recruit specifically within those communities.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]