And I know this ,because my son (who was with me at Fulham on Saturday) is one of the soon to be deployed.

If it's possible for you to keep left and right out of it in just one post that would be ace, so we can just debate the points raised. I don't identify with either or nail my colours to the mast as spectacularly as you lot because it doesn't help anyone. *rolls eyes*

Back to the point...

I agree that smaller numbers of minorities in a country probably goes some way to preventing segmentation and 'closed communities' like we have here. I also agree that having more islamic citizens in a country would by the very nature of probability increase the chance of terrorism 'in the name of islam'.

However I cannot agree that this is the sole reason why the UK is a target for terrorist attacks when compared with the two countries given as examples. I also don't think it's possible to claim as much. Plus, I don't see this as a reason to tar a whole swathe of individuals with the same brush. It's ignorant and helps no one.

Regarding colonialism and our history, it would be hard to argue that our past did not have at least a slight contributing effect. Note, I never said it was the primary reason, just part of it.

As for your point regarding Hindus and Sikhs, no idea. I'm theorising here because I don't know the answers, but possibly because they are supposedly more peaceful religions, because we're not occupying and bombing countries where the main religion is... Islam, and because the fact that most prominent terror organisations orchestrating these attacks proclaim themselves to be doing so in the name of muslim faith. Probably.

We have now spent 17 years, since the twin towers went down and Mr Bush called for a War on Terror, pledging to be tough on it. We have directly invaded 3 different countries, spent billions of taxpayers money, set up torture camps outside of international zones, kept people in detention without trial for months, killed millions of people, and all we have achieved is...what?

What has all the tough talking, 'mother of all bombs', 'incisive drone strikes', 'anyone not on our side is a terrorist sympathiser' rhetoric achieved?

We have absolutely wrecked three countries containing millions of innocent people. At home, the Muslim community is now more alienated and susceptible to conversion than ever before. And despite it all, we haven't stopped terrorist attacks.

What else has your posturing and toughness achieved? Anyone?

This line of attack doesn't hold water.

They're not the main protagonists. If you're planning a terrorist attack in Europe, if you've got half a brain you'll be aiming to target the highest profile, most committed and involved country possible. As the group leader, America is tricky, so its close ally the UK will do nicely thank you very much.

There have also been terrorist attacks in other countries besides the UK, such as France, Spain and Belgium which has had a significant number of recent attacks. It's worth pointing out that Belgium committed far less troops to the 'War on terror' and 'Operation Enduring Freedom' than Poland, which was also one of the leading contributors to the NATO force in Afghanistan, and only marginally more than Hungary.

Has this point been trotted out to tee up a reply (in regard to perceived anti-muslim refugee laws in Poland, ergo supporting the constant anti-immigration arguments on here) if so the basis for it being made is in fact incorrect. Poland accepts muslim immigrants and refugees, it does not accept relocation refugees from other countries.

Poland also has far less of a history with the Middle East, colonialism and empire building.

Well, the Hindu and Sikn point just shows that points about colonialism in respect to Islam is nonsense. All of those same countries contained those religions. I disagree. Just because another faction is present and didn’t do something doesn’t make the point invalid.

Your conclusion that these religions are more peaceful is only part of the answer. The truth is that the pious versions of those religions integrate more easily into western institutions than some sects of Islam. Agreed

A couple of minority sects of Islam are not an issue but there is a huge integration issue with the religion in general and within that haze these extremists exist. Agree to some extent

In this paragraph you then conflate colonialism with more recent history, which is a separate point and actually does feed into part of why this terrorism exists. Combine. It has to be part of it, you can’t be selective, even if it’s only a small part of the story, just to fit a narrative.

Not that I view that country's parliament and its decisions should be held hostage by threats from a minority of violent religious fruitcakes from within Islam.....But a community where half of them aren't interested in western liberal integration. Agreed in part. But they also shouldn’t be ignored.

Edited by Stirlingsays (14 Aug 2018 6.59pm)[/quote

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Maybe the Muslim Council of Britain should have spoken out to condemn the London bombings and done more to stop hate preachers spewing their bile on the streets of London. They only started speaking out when the s*** hit the fan.