Police Shootings in Paris

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Police Shootings in Paris

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

Michaelawt85 Bexley 21 Apr 17 3.40pm
Originally posted by bubble wrap Apart from the Tide and Earthquakes that is. Add karaoke bars and blow up dolls in vending machines. When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC
Alert a moderator to this post

Michaelawt85

Bexley 21 Apr 17 3.40pm

Originally posted by bubble wrap

Apart from the Tide and Earthquakes that is.

Add karaoke bars and blow up dolls in vending machines.

When I was a young girl my Mother said to me.. You listen here kid you're CPFC

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 21 Apr 17 3.44pm
Originally posted by NKEagle Allah sent them Godzilla instead. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

21 Apr 17 3.44pm

Originally posted by NKEagle

Allah sent them Godzilla instead.

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

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 21 Apr 17 3.52pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 I'm not sure what your point is. Of course they weren't asking for it, but the reality is that when you go to war, the enemy is prone to strike back and we do have to live with that reality. What did you think would happen when we started to target IS a known terror group, that they wouldn't fight back, that their followers wouldn't commit pointless acts of atrocity There isn't really I don't think much else we can do other than stay in that war now, because it has to be fought. Of course it angers me, but that's the price of doing the right thing. I just refuse to blame those who are not responsible. Mmmmm....well if we are at war why aren't we doing internment? That stopped any possible attacks in the world wars. The reality is that we are at war with a sub set of a group. So internment isn't a fair solution..if ever...but it was effective.....That group should be doing far more to identify those within it...Instead they and their supporters moan and deflect....They are either unwilling or our laws or security services are useless at effectively dealing with extremists or both or all three. If it's a problem with our legal system then it needs to be changed to reflect the problem. I don't like sacrificing lives to emotional and political expediency. The longer this issue goes on the more and more radical solutions become acceptable to larger numbers of people. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

21 Apr 17 3.52pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I'm not sure what your point is. Of course they weren't asking for it, but the reality is that when you go to war, the enemy is prone to strike back and we do have to live with that reality. What did you think would happen when we started to target IS a known terror group, that they wouldn't fight back, that their followers wouldn't commit pointless acts of atrocity

There isn't really I don't think much else we can do other than stay in that war now, because it has to be fought. Of course it angers me, but that's the price of doing the right thing.

I just refuse to blame those who are not responsible.

Mmmmm....well if we are at war why aren't we doing internment? That stopped any possible attacks in the world wars.

The reality is that we are at war with a sub set of a group. So internment isn't a fair solution..if ever...but it was effective.....That group should be doing far more to identify those within it...Instead they and their supporters moan and deflect....They are either unwilling or our laws or security services are useless at effectively dealing with extremists or both or all three.

If it's a problem with our legal system then it needs to be changed to reflect the problem.

I don't like sacrificing lives to emotional and political expediency.

The longer this issue goes on the more and more radical solutions become acceptable to larger numbers of people.

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

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 21 Apr 17 4.17pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 I think the greater significance is that they're radicalised by Islamic fundamentalism (specifically Al-Qaeda and Islamic State) - a very specific form of Islam. We notably had no problem either prior to 2001 with Muslims in the UK. Indeed, it was single mothers who were the scapegoat de jour back then.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 21 Apr 17 4.17pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I think the greater significance is that they're radicalised by Islamic fundamentalism (specifically Al-Qaeda and Islamic State) - a very specific form of Islam.

We notably had no problem either prior to 2001 with Muslims in the UK.

Indeed, it was single mothers who were the scapegoat de jour back then.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 21 Apr 17 4.22pm
Originally posted by nickgusset Indeed, it was single mothers who were the scapegoat de jour back then. What attack were they responsible for? The mass ramming of Ann Summers with baby strollers?
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

21 Apr 17 4.22pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by nickgusset

Indeed, it was single mothers who were the scapegoat de jour back then.

What attack were they responsible for?

The mass ramming of Ann Summers with baby strollers?

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 21 Apr 17 4.54pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Mmmmm....well if we are at war why aren't we doing internment? That stopped any possible attacks in the world wars. The reality is that we are at war with a sub set of a group. So internment isn't a fair solution..if ever...but it was effective.....That group should be doing far more to identify those within it...Instead they and their supporters moan and deflect....They are either unwilling or our laws or security services are useless at effectively dealing with extremists or both or all three. If it's a problem with our legal system then it needs to be changed to reflect the problem. I don't like sacrificing lives to emotional and political expediency. The longer this issue goes on the more and more radical solutions become acceptable to larger numbers of people. Internment doesn't really work. In WWI there were a number of sabotage strikes until the Security Service broke key German Spy rings. In WWII there was no need for the Germans to establish a 'home front' because they had air superiority and were bombing the living f**k out of the UK with relative impunity. Instead, it was the UK that orchestrated, organised, armed, trained and directed 'terrorists' and non-combatants, against German and infrastructure targets - And very successfully as well. Also I would be wary about saying the 'Community could do more', because it does seem that the security services are doing a remarkable job of foiling plots and conspiracies - and I'm very certain they couldn't do that without Muslim assets and intelligence from within the Muslim community. Which is exactly how they operated against the Provisional IRA and INLA. No one likes 'sacrificing' lives, but you cannot win a war without doing so. The dangers of increasingly repressive measures is that you just end up creating a longer and greater problem. Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists across the world, because it portrayed the US as corrupt, hypocritical, cruel and inhuman. Everything these groups had always claimed it was. Its a terrible situation, but the reality is, I think, we're about as secure as we can get without risking making the situation worse. If you start rounding up people without trial, it never ends up solving the problem - It just creates new ones - Because if we do that, we're forcing people to pick the other side. We won't create allies in Muslim communities by arresting and holding people indefinitely on suspicion - But we will create the kind of anger that these groups exploit to radicalise and recruit people. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 21 Apr 17 4.54pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Mmmmm....well if we are at war why aren't we doing internment? That stopped any possible attacks in the world wars.

If it's a problem with our legal system then it needs to be changed to reflect the problem.

I don't like sacrificing lives to emotional and political expediency.

The longer this issue goes on the more and more radical solutions become acceptable to larger numbers of people.

Internment doesn't really work. In WWI there were a number of sabotage strikes until the Security Service broke key German Spy rings.

In WWII there was no need for the Germans to establish a 'home front' because they had air superiority and were bombing the living f**k out of the UK with relative impunity.

Instead, it was the UK that orchestrated, organised, armed, trained and directed 'terrorists' and non-combatants, against German and infrastructure targets - And very successfully as well.

Also I would be wary about saying the 'Community could do more', because it does seem that the security services are doing a remarkable job of foiling plots and conspiracies - and I'm very certain they couldn't do that without Muslim assets and intelligence from within the Muslim community. Which is exactly how they operated against the Provisional IRA and INLA.

No one likes 'sacrificing' lives, but you cannot win a war without doing so. The dangers of increasingly repressive measures is that you just end up creating a longer and greater problem.

Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists across the world, because it portrayed the US as corrupt, hypocritical, cruel and inhuman. Everything these groups had always claimed it was.

Its a terrible situation, but the reality is, I think, we're about as secure as we can get without risking making the situation worse. If you start rounding up people without trial, it never ends up solving the problem - It just creates new ones - Because if we do that, we're forcing people to pick the other side.

We won't create allies in Muslim communities by arresting and holding people indefinitely on suspicion - But we will create the kind of anger that these groups exploit to radicalise and recruit people.

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

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 21 Apr 17 7.39pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Internment doesn't really work. In WWI there were a number of sabotage strikes until the Security Service broke key German Spy rings. In WWII there was no need for the Germans to establish a 'home front' because they had air superiority and were bombing the living f**k out of the UK with relative impunity. Instead, it was the UK that orchestrated, organised, armed, trained and directed 'terrorists' and non-combatants, against German and infrastructure targets - And very successfully as well. Also I would be wary about saying the 'Community could do more', because it does seem that the security services are doing a remarkable job of foiling plots and conspiracies - and I'm very certain they couldn't do that without Muslim assets and intelligence from within the Muslim community. Which is exactly how they operated against the Provisional IRA and INLA. No one likes 'sacrificing' lives, but you cannot win a war without doing so. The dangers of increasingly repressive measures is that you just end up creating a longer and greater problem. Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists across the world, because it portrayed the US as corrupt, hypocritical, cruel and inhuman. Everything these groups had always claimed it was. Its a terrible situation, but the reality is, I think, we're about as secure as we can get without risking making the situation worse. If you start rounding up people without trial, it never ends up solving the problem - It just creates new ones - Because if we do that, we're forcing people to pick the other side. We won't create allies in Muslim communities by arresting and holding people indefinitely on suspicion - But we will create the kind of anger that these groups exploit to radicalise and recruit people. Saying that 'Internment doesn't really work' in the world wars is just completely false. Without internment it is highly likely that the situation would have been far worse than the minor issues that occurred. 'Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists'. Yeah like it makes the slightest bit of difference whether Guantanamo Bay exists or not. If it didn't it would just be something else. As we saw with Laden's excuses for 9/11. Think you are creating allies in the Islamic community using your 'softy softy' don't upset them with the realities do you? I think you are doing a dis-service actually to both them and us. Many Islamic reformists completely disagree with you. Thanks to multiculturalism and 'softy softy' the approach you appear to support has landed us with a huge problem that...for example America with its far larger population doesn't have on the same scale. Personally I think the left have lost the right to be listened to on these issues and everytime an innocent life dies I attach some of that blame to their ideological and wholesale useless approach. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

21 Apr 17 7.39pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Internment doesn't really work. In WWI there were a number of sabotage strikes until the Security Service broke key German Spy rings.

In WWII there was no need for the Germans to establish a 'home front' because they had air superiority and were bombing the living f**k out of the UK with relative impunity.

Instead, it was the UK that orchestrated, organised, armed, trained and directed 'terrorists' and non-combatants, against German and infrastructure targets - And very successfully as well.

No one likes 'sacrificing' lives, but you cannot win a war without doing so. The dangers of increasingly repressive measures is that you just end up creating a longer and greater problem.

Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists across the world, because it portrayed the US as corrupt, hypocritical, cruel and inhuman. Everything these groups had always claimed it was.

Saying that 'Internment doesn't really work' in the world wars is just completely false. Without internment it is highly likely that the situation would have been far worse than the minor issues that occurred.

'Guantanamo Bay became a rallying symbol for Islamists'.

Yeah like it makes the slightest bit of difference whether Guantanamo Bay exists or not. If it didn't it would just be something else. As we saw with Laden's excuses for 9/11.

Think you are creating allies in the Islamic community using your 'softy softy' don't upset them with the realities do you? I think you are doing a dis-service actually to both them and us. Many Islamic reformists completely disagree with you.

Thanks to multiculturalism and 'softy softy' the approach you appear to support has landed us with a huge problem that...for example America with its far larger population doesn't have on the same scale.

Personally I think the left have lost the right to be listened to on these issues and everytime an innocent life dies I attach some of that blame to their ideological and wholesale useless approach.

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

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Apr 17 5.43pm
Would it make it better when you start rounding up Muslims, without trial, for indefinite detention, on the basis of suspicion. Didn't really work in Northern Ireland, hasn't really worked so far in the war of terror, and didn't work in Iraq. Yes, in the short term, if you assume that we could accurately determine the right people to detain, it might work. Problem is, that it doesn't really work like that, because if you knew the right people to detain, you could convict them lawfully in court (under UK anti-terrorism laws). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 22 Apr 17 5.43pm

Would it make it better when you start rounding up Muslims, without trial, for indefinite detention, on the basis of suspicion. Didn't really work in Northern Ireland, hasn't really worked so far in the war of terror, and didn't work in Iraq.

Yes, in the short term, if you assume that we could accurately determine the right people to detain, it might work. Problem is, that it doesn't really work like that, because if you knew the right people to detain, you could convict them lawfully in court (under UK anti-terrorism laws).

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

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Apr 17 5.49pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Saying that 'Internment doesn't really work' in the world wars is just completely false. Without internment it is highly likely that the situation would have been far worse than the minor issues that occurred. Assuming that of course those detained wouldn't have fought for the UK, which is very questionable, or couldn't have been exploited by the secret service when exposed - or useful to SOE. etc It didn't help. In Northern Ireland - Internment actually ended up creating a safe zone for the command of the PIRA, OIRA, INLA and Loyalists - as well as introducing people who weren't members of those groups, but thought to be, to them. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 22 Apr 17 5.49pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Assuming that of course those detained wouldn't have fought for the UK, which is very questionable, or couldn't have been exploited by the secret service when exposed - or useful to SOE. etc

It didn't help.

In Northern Ireland - Internment actually ended up creating a safe zone for the command of the PIRA, OIRA, INLA and Loyalists - as well as introducing people who weren't members of those groups, but thought to be, to them.

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

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Police Shootings in Paris

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors