Why silly saugages want to blow people up?

[Famous Mortimer]

In which case here we go!

1) The Tamil Tigers are a good example to compare with - because they have a rational, "real-world" political programme.  They also commit acts of sedition and violence against the nation with which they have a dispute. Like Eta and the IRA.

But no one would suggest that suicide bombings are specific to Muslim.  In this country, at the moment, all the suicide bombers are Muslim.

2) I don't think "the West" should take responsibility for what's happening in Iraq - do you seriously mean Canada is responsible for crazed misogynists and sectarian nutters causing misery in Iraq, and if Canada took the effort to find out why in 05/06 a group of savages planned to detonate truck bombs (allegedy) they could somehow change their foreign policy and stop the same sorts of people thinking in the same way.  That's such a sloppy use of language, such agit-prop angst, as to be beyond belief.  Now - should the US and UK take responsibility for uncorking the sectarian carnage?  I guess so.  Maybe they should be proud to take responsibility, we'll see in 50 years.  The UK isn't at the moment killing muslims, the UK and the US are trying to improve conditions.

3) I just don't understand why there would be an identical amount of IRA suicide bombings.  I don't think the IRA were a totalitarian movement, nor do I think it quite works in the equation your suggesting.  I don't think you grasp "what I'm saying at all".  Actually, why do you think there would be an identical amount of bombings - I don't grasp what point you're making?

4) Muslims haven't been bombing this country, but crazed radical politicised muslims have been persecuting jews, and carrying out acts of terrorism long before the Iraq war, and long before 9/11.  Of course some of this is about Western foreign policy, but not in the sense you think.  Why were 202 people murdered in Bali in 2002?  Are you saying that Australia should have played no role in the liberation of East Timor?  Are you saying muslims should be allowed to slaughter and oppress with impunity wherever they like?

I think I've covered you're other points above (US aid to Palestine), and why Blair should or shouldn't have "criticised" Israel in the Lebanon war isn't really very relevant.  It just doesn't stand up for me as a reason why people might blow themselves and innocent kids to pieces?  I recall that incident being quite complex, and I recall Israel being rocketed after a couple of soldiers were kidnapped.

Let's have a go. If we were talking about just suicide bombings in this country, now, you might have a point about them all being Muslims. But that's needlessly precise (the only way your argument can be seen to hold water too) and hurts the debate.

Mentioning Canada because your definition of "the West" in this argument is needlessly broad...you make my point for me, because I don't recall any terrorist bombings in Canada, a point which I suppose you'll argue bears no relation to their lack of involvement in the "war on terror".

You're splitting hairs over the IRA. They were a terrorist organisation who bombed civilian targets. After years of trying to fight them, they decided to listen to what they wanted, and lo and behold the number of bombings fell off to zero. The point is exactly relevant to the current political situation and you're brushing it to one side because it directly contradicts what you're trying to say.

"crazed radical politicised muslims." Wonderful neutral language there Borboski...I know us stupid lefties and anti-war types always bring this up, but Israel has been oppressing the Arab population since its inception. Feel free to go look at all the UN security council resolutions it's broken if that's your thing, but the USA continues to fund them to the tune of billions of dollars a year. Re: the issue in the Lebanon, I'm more worried about the country with nuclear weapons and a history of oppression of a racial group than I am about a small group of poorly armed Hezbollah fighters.

I'm not trying to make the argument any simpler than it has to be, but I'm not interested in your increasingly desperate attempts to lay the blame for this anywhere other than the doors of the US, Israel and the UK, and their friends and supporters in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. If they hadn't invaded Iraq, and if they stopped supporting Israel, the number of terrorists would drop. In this case, it really is that simple. The fact they aren't Iraqis makes no difference, as someone who's apparently read as much as you have will know.

[Al Tha Funkee Homosapien]

Actually Canada had about 2,500 troops in Afghanistan as part of the ISAF. Also recently there was an alleged plot to attack places in Canada.

[rudi]

I just can't imagine Canadians panicking.

I bet it'd be well-ordered chaos.

[Al Tha Funkee Homosapien]

They'd be wondering what all the panic was aboot.

[rudi]

If this was QI the siren would be going off right about now.

[Still Not George]

Let's not kid ourselves here. Islamists like to aggrandize themselves with words like "global jihad" and "the brotherhood of Islam" but in the end Islam, like all monolithic religions, is a huge swarming mess of conflicting cults, creeds and interpretations. Even Sunni and Shia are little more than banners of convenience for vaguely agreeing groups.

There are only a very few powers in the world right now that are conducting concerted campaigns against global concepts or entire regions, and Islamic fundamentalists are not amongst them. This entire thing is more about the US reintroducting an old kind of realpolitik to the arena; imperialism by forced globalisation. The "War on Terror" is a convenience in that it allows the US a target that is nebulous and, due to Islamic terrorism, frightening. After all, a new Cold War against Russia or China might not go to their favour; it's hardly difficult to see why they'd avoid it, especially with China waging such effective economic warfare against it. So the US message is clear to everyone - "Do things our way or we will invade."

The problem is, of course, that this course of action is being brought about by short-sighted corporatists and ideologues, and as such it has little chance of success, as we see in Iraq.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6904622.stm

A bit of justice. That's what happens when you wish death upon cartoonists.