Asymmetric warfare, terrorism, and Daesh.

Hmm. The dim duo tag-team again.


As was the opinion, and you, ‘sophisticated' enough to use the expression you seem familiar with, and area you seem obsessed with.

???
They are indeed typical reactions for that part of the world, and actually, ‘Vlad is a perfect example for that. And if, as you so kindly put it, 'some half witted Muslims’ , are foolish enough to try it in Russia, they may get short shift.
The Singularly Fixated one returns.

You seem to have (as usual) missed my point that Vlad is not only able to use a minor incident to justify ramping up opppressive actions in the run up to a rigged election, but is also more than capable of MANUFACTURING an incident.

Anyway, they have arrested a suspect, and it has all gone quiet, so it was probably a Russian Christian criminal and the problem of blaming IS may have gone away.(Unless he converts to Islam while awaiting trial...)

EDIT- A chap called Dmitry Lukyanenko has been charged In the last few hours. He appears to be a Russian nationalist terrorist. -should they be given 'short shrift'as well, considering most if them support Vlad?

In your world view, and this is one in which you have admitted that you have no idea about the multiple facets of Islam, the Muslims equals BAD. By extension, any who argues otherwise is also BAD.

All I am trying to do is point out that this is simplistic, shallow and won't allow you to understand what is going on.

Simply being lazy and deciding that all Muslims are the turban wearing bogeyman under the bed won't allow us to come up with ways to stop them doing harm without going down the roads that end in camps and mass graves.
 
Last edited:
In your world view, and this is one in which you have admitted that you have no idea about the multiple facets of Islam, the Muslims equals BAD. By extension, any who argues otherwise is also BAD.
You are really bone Hector.

Have been immersed in the spiritual heartland of the religion for nearly a quarter of a century, and probably had more exposure and understanding of this particular religion than you.

You are correct in that I do consider it an intolerant, and in many aspects a backward religion. It does not mean that I think every Muslim is automatically bad. Your generalisations are simply a reflection of your own personality.
 
It's almost as if IS say any old crap to keep themselves in the news and newspapers say any old crap to sell units and monomaniacs listen to any old crap in order to peddle their monomania.
 
And IS was a figment of everybody’s imagination.
No. People looking at Iraq for the last decade have been following the evolution of the group's which eventually became of IS and the conditions in Iraq which ensured that a group like IS came into existence.

What that doesn't mean is that we have to collectively sh1t our pants over the threat from IS just because the Mail can't resist rebroadcasting IS media every time they publish something predictably controversial.
 
I make a comment that things seem to have been going well and you leap in to attack?
It has been heartening to see Christmas and New Year pass peacefully despite the threats that were made.
You are rather a simple chap, and, a tad naive. Someone else who has led the watch, and fight against terrorism in the UK does not seem to share the rather simplistic/optimistic view you seem to show.

Assistant Commissioner for Specialist Operations of the Metropolitan Police Service. Concurrent Chair of the National Police Chiefs' Council Counter-Terrorism Coordination Committee, National Lead for Counter Terrorism Policing is Mark Peter Rowley

Previously Chief Constable of Surrey Police then Acting Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police between February 2017 and April 2017. He, with all the information he has at his disposal has made a number of fairly specific warnings and it not the Daily Wail that these reports come from.
AC Mark Rowley discusses the threat of terrorism
NHS not doing enough to help police prevent terror attacks, warns Met's counterterrorism chief
Isis planning 'enormous and spectacular attacks', anti-terror chief warns
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone has said that there isn't a serious threat from terrorism, so I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve with your latest round of spamming.

Anyway, on the subject of combating the threat from terrorism, did you read the link that I gave you on the government strategy to defeat terrorism? I'm guessing not so reshow having read it.
 
My ’spamming’ are simply responses to your attacks, and flip flops.
It's almost as if IS say any old crap to keep themselves in the news and newspapers say any old crap to sell units and monomaniacs listen to any old crap in order to peddle their monomania.
What that doesn't mean is that we have to collectively sh1t our pants over the threat from IS just because the Mail can't resist rebroadcasting IS media every time they publish something predictably controversial.
But then when I posted the warnings from the head of anti-terrorism, then all of a sudden its...
I don't think anyone has said that there isn't a serious threat from terrorism,
So what exactly is it, a serious threat, or you objecting to being warned about threats?

And incidentally none of the reports quoted by me were from the Mail.

did you read the link that I gave you on the government strategy to defeat terrorism?
There have been a large number of ongoing reports and opinions on Government strategy, some of which are then contradicted by other pundits. Which link of yours gave the golden answer to the problem?
 
There is one government strategy; Contest:

Counter-terrorism strategy (CONTEST) - GOV.UK

There is so much money, time and manpower invested in this stratgey that if you haven't looked at it, then you cannot understand what the government is trying to achieve in and around the threats from terrorism. Incidently, one of the components of the strategy, Prevent, is hugely unpopular with Islamists, their left-wing support base and increasingly amongst right wing extremists, which gives you an idea of its effectiveness.

As I said many posts back when I originally posted the link, read it and learn something.
 
You are really bone Hector.

Have been immersed in the spiritual heartland of the religion for nearly a quarter of a century, and probably had more exposure and understanding of this particular religion than you.

You are correct in that I do consider it an intolerant, and in many aspects a backward religion. It does not mean that I think every Muslim is automatically bad. Your generalisations are simply a reflection of your own personality.
If you have had so much exposure, why can't you tell the difference between the various sects, and why they are so fond of killing each other?
Alternatively, why are you so unable to learn?
If there is anyone bone around here...
 
Is daesh still a viable threat?
Rise and fall of Isis: its dream of a caliphate is over, so what now?

And OMG...it isn’t from the Daily Wail. What a surprise.

It remains clear that any victory over Isis is only partial. The recent military offensives unaccompanied by a parallel political effort.

There remains deep huge resentment and fear among Iraqi Sunnis. The Syrian civil war grinds on.

ISIS aims and threats from within the ‘British’ citizens who left, and have vowed to return, and continue the insurgency that preceded before their successful campaigns of 2014, remain.

There are still individuals here that remain committed to the cause.

The dimbo duo, (masked ring piece focussed Golly, and disheveled orange veggie) will undoubtedly disagree.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone claimed that there weren't still Islamists in the UK that remain committed to Islamism?

This sentence needs a bit of rewording:

ISIS aims and threats from within the ‘British’ citizens who left, and have vowed to return, and continue the insurgency that preceded before their successful campaigns of 2014, remain.
Are you saying that jihadis returning to the UK will carry out terrorist attacks or that they will try and wage an insurgency in the UK? Either you don't understand some of the words you use or you don't understand how the insurgency in Iraq escalated from acts of terrorism to insurgency to holding territory.

I take it you still haven't read the link that I provided to you and therefore remain committed to your continued ignorance of the government strategy against terrorism?

This following link probably belongs in the Iraq thread and I'm not a fan of Ms Shackle normally but she did go to Mosul so fair play to her:

The bureaucracy of Isis

For me, it gives a good account of post-IS Iraq and illustrates the difficulty that exists in reconciling the different factions in the country.
 
Daesh returnees demonstrated their beliefs, behaviour and methods over the time they tried to establish their Caliphate. Those who sympathise with them over here, demonstrating a similar mindset.

Both should be isolated from the general population.
 
Operation Barracuda and Operation Temperer now underway to co-ordinate a military response team for any large scale terrorist action.
Anti-terror super squad formed to safeguard Britain from attacks
Before we all start fapping off at the super-duper 5.11 wearing squads, might it be a good time to point out the the collection of local intelligence and community contacts have been ground down.

Bit of a shame really.

I really don't get why it is possible to prepare for great military interventions, but not for the patient intelligence collection to stop terrorist attacks.
 
Is daesh still a viable threat?
Rise and fall of Isis: its dream of a caliphate is over, so what now?

And OMG...it isn’t from the Daily Wail. What a surprise.

It remains clear that any victory over Isis is only partial. The recent military offensives unaccompanied by a parallel political effort.

There remains deep huge resentment and fear among Iraqi Sunnis. The Syrian civil war grinds on.

ISIS aims and threats from within the ‘British’ citizens who left, and have vowed to return, and continue the insurgency that preceded before their successful campaigns of 2014, remain.

There are still individuals here that remain committed to the cause.

The dimbo duo, (masked ring piece focussed Golly, and disheveled orange veggie) will undoubtedly disagree.
Ad hominem aside, I partly agree with you , but for entirely different reasons.

Firstly, the military option was always going to be partial. It is because IS was a progressive growth of a wider Sunni Muslim movement.

'Nationalism' based Arab groups like Ba'ath had tried to evade sectarianism and took in religious sects and minorities, but also became identified with crude dictatorships.
Pan Muslim groups like the Muslim Brotherhood became radicalized and became proxies for Saudi Wahhabism.
Then you got increasingly radical groups like Islamic Jihad, al Qaeda and eventually IS.
Of course, what is usually missed by @Resasi (although my predictive text appropriately offers 'rehash' instead) is any grasp of WHY these groups have evolved.
The largest Sunni Muslim population (Indonesia) have very few radical Muslims. In Resasi world, they should be leading the jihad against the infidels.
They don't.

So, WHY NOT?
Answer- Islam isn't the driver. It is a hook people hang their existing problems on.

So, who are they?
Answer-the poor. The desperate. The criminal. The loony. People looking to change their lives, who often know next to nothing about Islam, and who follow snake oil peddling preachers. Above all, the naive who were looking for a religious utopia.

The crushing of IS on the ground will probably deter the Paradise on Earth cultists, as the project clearly failed, and many of those types will come home with their tails between their legs.

But what about the rest? The profile of your average jihadi is of a dimwitted peasant, first or second generation immigrant, often with jail time. No job, no prospect, drugs, mental health issues...

Those are the real threat, and the few zealots and recruiters will have no shortage of them to recruit.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads