Man screams "this is for Syria" before stabbing rampage on London Underground

[Påsan]

Sic.. I was literately just criticizing my English ex over skype for avoiding the tube due to terrorist threats.

Their objective is to terrorize people and they are succeeding. Be it local lunatics like this or organized attacks.

[Copperknickers II]

Which is never going to happen if the West keeps destabilizing the region. Leave them alone and let them develop.

Let them develop what? ISIS are 'developing' a hellscape based on fear and death. Iran left to their own devices would try their best to destroy Israel and besiege Saudi Arabia. The Syrians will continue to kill each other until they are all dead, or worse locked up in Assad's torture chambers. Other Islamic countries will either become embroiled in their own internal tensions between Islamists and secular authoritarians, or join in the proxy wars between Sunni and Shia states, fuelling the jihadis in the process. The whole thing could very well end in a situation similar to the D.R. Congo, with armed factions ruling small fiefdoms, with the lucky ones negotiating deals with multinational corporations for access to any oil or other resources which lie within their territory, and occasionally massacring villages who try to resist them. This has already happened in Syria, Iraq and Libya, and the Sinai peninsula, Yemen and Lebanon are little better.

The only solution to this is a Western/Russian deal for a power sharing agreement which will necessitate taking sides (probably with Assad) and destroying the opposition.

[Basil II the B.S]

Let them develop what? ISIS are 'developing' a hellscape based on fear and death. Iran left to their own devices would try their best to destroy Israel and besiege Saudi Arabia. The Syrians will continue to kill each other until they are all dead, or worse locked up in Assad's torture chambers. Other Islamic countries will either become embroiled in their own internal tensions between Islamists and secular authoritarians, or join in the proxy wars between Sunni and Shia states, fuelling the jihadis in the process. The whole thing could very well end in a situation similar to the D.R. Congo, with armed factions ruling small fiefdoms, with the lucky ones negotiating deals with multinational corporations for access to any oil or other resources which lie within their territory, and occasionally massacring villages who try to resist them. This has already happened in Syria, Iraq and Libya, and the Sinai peninsula, Yemen and Lebanon are little better.

The only solution to this is a Western/Russian deal for a power sharing agreement which will necessitate taking sides (probably with Assad) and destroying the opposition.

Isis is the only case where I justify intervention.
Everything else is something they have to deal with by themselves.
Let's not get on a high horse and pretend that the democratization of Europe was painless and war-free. The introduction of the masses to politics and the extrension of the suffrage to universal adults was one of the main reasons of the success of fascism, communism and ultimately a contributing factor to world wars. It will most likely happen there as well but this isn't something the West should take the blame for.
Intervention in the area only made things worse and worse anyway, what's the point of insisting in a failing strategy?

[Copperknickers II]

Isis is the only case where I justify intervention.
Everything else is something they have to deal with by themselves.
Let's not get on a high horse and pretend that the democratization of Europe was painless and war-free. The introduction of the masses to politics and the extrension of the suffrage to universal adults was one of the main reasons of the success of fascism, communism and ultimately a contributing factor to world wars. It will most likely happen there as well but this isn't something the West should take the blame for.
Intervention in the area only made things worse and worse anyway, what's the point of insisting in a failing strategy?

How can our strategy be failing, when we don't even have a strategy? We haven't actually tried intervening in the Middle East yet. Iraq wasn't an intervention, it was a war of conquest for oil. We intervened in Kuwait and that worked pretty well, Kuwait is still an independent and relatively wealthy and terror-free country. America frequently intervenes in a non-military way on behalf of Israel, and that has worked pretty well, since Israel is still there and hasn't had to fight a major war for several decades now. Nobody really intervened in Libya beyond a gentle shove to Gaddafi. And we have not intervened in any meaningful way in Syria at all, we just bet all our money on our horse and are now letting it run the race with minimal assistance. Unfortunately, it seems we picked the Shetland pony, which was unlikely to beat a massive thoroughbred Arabian (Assad), or a monstrous fire-breathing devil horse (ISIS), or even any of the other normal-sized horses.

What I suggest is that we pick a decent horse and then ride it to victory. Which will involve choosing a horse, and training it up, and committing to helping it. The alternative is we lose all our money on the horse. And we cannot afford to lose all our money on the horse. I'm not just talking about actual money: like I said, there's a huge risk of genocide, mass migration on a scale not previously imaginable, the destruction of our regional allies and thus all regional influence, and the obvious consequences of terrorism and economic instability which arise from an entire region of the world falling apart.

[Mangalore]

Depends on where you are talking about it. Doesn't need a legal market in most of Europe as there is this wonderful place called the Balkans where one can pretty much buy anything and smuggle it past non-existing border controls.

Call me a gun toting radical if you like, but I really think gun control does more to limit law abiding citizens possibility to defend themselves than it does to limit gun access for criminals and terrorists.

Said traveling and smuggling is still much more complicated than buying a firearm from the illegal second hand market. That's a very narrow scenario to complain about a policy. The defense argument also seems to constantly fall flat in the US. How often was some spree shooter or terrorist stopped by someone else but regular police/SWAT/security? I think none is the answer though I might have missed some obscure occasion. It is also imo overstated how often criminals use guns on non criminals to facilitate their crime. Outside a very specific narrow brand and possibly adding national differences that is very few criminals who actually go about their "day job" with the intention of adding such a felony to their list and those not being so conscious would not think so far ahead to travel to the balkans to get their hands on guns.




Anyway, do we know more about the guy in this case?

[Copperknickers II]

Said traveling and smuggling is still much more complicated than buying a firearm from the illegal second hand market.

Not really. The Schengen area makes it extremely easy to smuggle weapons from the Balkans into northern Europe. There are several million military grade weapons lying around in Serbia, Albania and Bosnia whereas there is not much call for an illegal second hand market because most guns in Europe are shotguns and hunting rifles which aren't so useful for criminal purposes as handguns and machine guns.

How often was some spree shooter or terrorist stopped by someone else but regular police/SWAT/security?

Actually, to be fair that has happened on numerous occasions.

http://controversialtimes.com/issues...uys-with-guns/

Outside a very specific narrow brand and possibly adding national differences that is very few criminals who actually go about their "day job" with the intention of adding such a felony to their list and those not being so conscious would not think so far ahead to travel to the balkans to get their hands on guns.

You seem to misunderstand the situation: criminals don't travel to the Balkans to get their hands on a gun, the Albanian and Serbian mafias send them out to order to their affiliates in Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris and Marseille alongside their usual drug and migrant shipments. It's a lucrative side venture for the organisations who already have huge operations in Central and Western Europe, and any serious terrorist/organised criminal is going to be very familiar with their local gun merchant because they are the same people who sell the drugs and prostitutes.

[Condottiere 40K]

If he wanted to do something for Syria, he should be there and fight for whatever vision he deems worthwhile.

[youngfool]

... dude, oil just dropped below $40, mostly thanks to steadfast saudi support and several countries increasing production simultaneously. this fantasy of yours is not going to happen any time soon. saudi arabia and half the world is waging an economic war against iran/russia/venezuela, especially iran who is looking to take advantage of sanctions relief, and saudi needs US and EU support to do this.

saudi arabia is only the chief sponsor of sunni terrorism if you mean saudi individuals, although qataris are more reliable. at the state level however, iran is unmatched (and if it's state policy to do so in iran, it is definitely encouraging the regular population to also support terrorism that is beneficial to iranian interests, mainly shiite groups and any anti-israel terrorist group)

then you also have to factor in iranian state contributions to primarily sunni groups like hamas and then there's the taliban.

long story short, iran is more likely to get its crap pushed in in the next few decades than the US is to abandon saudi arabia. unless we get a total loser like Canada's Trudeau for president


actually capitalism provides many jobs to what would have been typically a low employment area, they pay better than whatever their local job would have offered. "aggressive imposition of policies" you're acting like the west sailed into the place japan-like and demanded trade all over again, the reality is that smart leaders in the middle east have realized the power of global trade instead of being stuck back in whatever century with the ideology of freaking bin laden. is capitalism perfect? no, look at qatar, of course it can be abused but most western countries have learned some painful lessons about capitalism from the industrial revolution and two world wars, you still try to make it work. places like qatar haven't gone through that yet because they are relatively new to it.

'Dude,' if you think cheap oil is good news for everybody, then you need to pluck your head out of the quicksand of capitalist deceit and literate yourself with the global climate change movement. And 'dude' If you think 'capitalism' is a main provider of jobs, then you have truly fallen to the dark side. But just to make sure, ask yourself what caused the 2008 US crash and why? who's pocket did the staggering $700 billion US government bailout went? and who lost the most during that crisis? and if you feel ambitious and adventurous, ask yourself what has 'Reaganomics' done to America, what has 'Washington Consensus' done to the developing world and Argentina 2001 is an excellent point of entry to begin.

You will find some quick answer to those questions in Michael Moore's underrated US capitalism 101 documentary - Capitalism: A Love Story, which can be stream via youtube, I strongly recommend you to sit through its hours (its very entertaining i assure you), before you embarrass yourself further, on a topic you barely even understand.

[Condottiere 40K]

Current prediction has it that oil will drop to twenty bucks a barrel, which will make the Chinese and the Indians happy, less so Vlad.

[Basil II the B.S]

How can our strategy be failing, when we don't even have a strategy? We haven't actually tried intervening in the Middle East yet. Iraq wasn't an intervention, it was a war of conquest for oil. We intervened in Kuwait and that worked pretty well, Kuwait is still an independent and relatively wealthy and terror-free country. America frequently intervenes in a non-military way on behalf of Israel, and that has worked pretty well, since Israel is still there and hasn't had to fight a major war for several decades now. Nobody really intervened in Libya beyond a gentle shove to Gaddafi. And we have not intervened in any meaningful way in Syria at all, we just bet all our money on our horse and are now letting it run the race with minimal assistance. Unfortunately, it seems we picked the Shetland pony, which was unlikely to beat a massive thoroughbred Arabian (Assad), or a monstrous fire-breathing devil horse (ISIS), or even any of the other normal-sized horses.

The US has been destabilizing the region for the last 40 years, regularly switching sides, with the notable exeption of serving Israel's interests, which is the main reason the Muslim world is pissed off. The constant destabilization serves to prevent the rise of a unified Arab force that would block Israel expansion, while Iran remains cornered in its plateau up the mountains.
Europe just follows like peons. That's the ''great strategy''. Simple as that, exploit religious sectarianism to prevent the the success of Panarabism.

What I suggest is that we pick a decent horse and then ride it to victory. Which will involve choosing a horse, and training it up, and committing to helping it. The alternative is we lose all our money on the horse. And we cannot afford to lose all our money on the horse. I'm not just talking about actual money: like I said, there's a huge risk of genocide, mass migration on a scale not previously imaginable, the destruction of our regional allies and thus all regional influence, and the obvious consequences of terrorism and economic instability which arise from an entire region of the world falling apart.

The decent horses are dead already.

The real issue is solving Israel vs the Muslim world, everything else can be sorted out once that is fixed. Ignoring the big elephant in the room will never lead to a durable peace.

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

most guns in Europe are shotguns and hunting rifles which aren't so useful for criminal purposes as handguns and machine guns.

Yep and that's also why the EU's move to bann civilian ownership of semi-automatic weapons in the wake of the Paris attacks is so wrong, the attacks were carried out with fully automatic AK-47:s, those are not legally available to civilians regardless.

[Copperknickers II]

Yep and that's also why the EU's move to bann civilian ownership of semi-automatic weapons in the wake of the Paris attacks is so wrong, the attacks were carried out with fully automatic AK-47:s, those are not legally available to civilians regardless.

The Paris attacks were, but the San Bernardino attacks were semi-autos and that could easily happen in Europe. Europe is a bigger target than the USA after all so if it happened there the danger here is much greater.

[VINC.XXIII]

The Paris attacks were, but the San Bernardino attacks were semi-autos and that could easily happen in Europe. Europe is a bigger target than the USA after all so if it happened there the danger here is much greater.

Still all the guns used recently since the 1960's in terrorist activities in France(I includes autochtonous movements as muslim ones) were war weapons, so not matter if you forbid or allow weapons these guys will buy illegal war weapons.

M16, rocker launchers, anything you will never get...



btw, this event again shows that the individual is the problem(or its background), use of knives by muslim thugs is cultural, most of attacks by knife are commited by them. In Morroco this gang fashion is called "tcharmil"(look on Google image). Ok the guy is not moroccan, but still cultural issue which have probably equivalent in the whole Orient and Maghreb.

[removeduser_487563287433]

use of knives by muslim thugs is cultural, most of attacks by knife are commited by them.

Source.

[VINC.XXIII]

Source.

just translate the whole three decades papers about attack by knife...

want some recents?


https://faitdiversfrance.wordpress.com

knife= couteau, but other facts(sourced) are interesting too.

Funnily its forbidden in France to create ethnic statistics, but still its possible to get the great lines. Maybe you knows it, thats why you ask me sources, you knows by advance official stats like in US, UK or Netherland don't exists there.

[Royal Jester]

,,subdued by the police''

Wow,the commonry is not allowed to subdue that muslim human?Guess they need to concentrate more.

[removeduser_487563287433]

j

want some recents?

No I want a source to back up your claim that most knife crime is committed by Muslims. Or I want you to admit you just made that up. Either will do. Evasion will not.

Funnily its forbidden in France to create ethnic statistics, but still its possible to get the great lines. Maybe you knows it, thats why you ask me sources

Yes, in fact, I did. And that's why I know you're making stuff up.

,,subdued by the police''

Wow,the commonry is not allowed to subdue that muslim human?Guess they need to concentrate more.

Contrary to the belief of some of our far-right members people in the UK do indeed have the right to use violence in the defence of themselves as others. But contrary to the far-right circlejerk tackling a knife wielding maniac is no simple feat, especially when he has just injured four people, one seriously.

In the event the Metropolitan Police responded to the first emergency call within four minutes, tasered the suspect, and all victims are expected to survive and fully recover.

[fkizz]

Time to organize neo-Nazis for counter attack; I forsee a new age of street warfare between neo-Nazis and Islamic radicals.

Ironically, most of Jihadist massacre targets were secular left wing minded groups. Charlie Hedbo, concert of Death Metal, list goes on.

For some reason Jihadists prefer secular left wingers to slaughter rather than a pick a fight with neo Nazis. Maybe easier target.

Also the idea of Neo Nazis fighting to protect secular leftwingers has something that does not click..

[removeduser_487563287433]

Ironically, most of Jihadist massacre targets were secular left wing minded groups. Charlie Hedbo, concert of Death Metal, list goes on.

Um does it? What's left-wing, or secular, about an Eagles of Death Metal concert for 's sake? This is just a ridiculous statement.

For some reason Jihadists prefer secular left wingers to slaughter rather than a pick a fight with neo Nazis. Maybe easier target.

Also the idea of Neo Nazis fighting to protect secular leftwingers has something that does not click..

Could be that ISIS and Nazis are both fascists with very similar views.

[fkizz]

Things are only going to get worse. When will it end?

This is a Jihad, a Holy War. They are often meant to be inter-generational, going for centuries.
Take out AlQaeda, ISIS replaces the spot. Take out ISIS, something else will take the spot.

Well I must confess I watch with some curiosity secular people who very zealously condemned crusades now struggling to finding their "humanistic" solution to Jihadism.
Since 9/11 no consensus found, and massacres keep happening.