2 explosions in Manchester Arena - CONFIRMED Fatalities.

[ParanoiD84]

Well, define innocent. Sadly this is a very fluid term.
Don't believe in god? not innocent.
Believe in another god? not innocent.
Believe in many gods? not innocent.

and that is just a short list of things that would define you as no longer innocent.

8 year old children, seems pretty innocent to me. I do know all about their teachings though and everything not a sunni is to be put to death that's why they are slaughtering hundreds of thousands of non sunnis in the middleast. A conflict that's been going on since their profet died and something that will never be solved, just look at Saudi and Iran, hmm i wonder why they hate eachother and fight in yemen and the same thing with all other groups slaughtering eachother in the middleast.

We get like 0.1% of all that violence the rest is muslims killing muslims.

[Templar 331]

His name has been dropped.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...als/ar-BBBsn9Z

U.S. security sources, citing British intelligence officials, said he was born in Manchester in 1994 to parents of Libyan origin.

Oh look, he's not an immigrant.

[Freighter]

In my experience with people being seduced by radical thoughts, the jihadist-to-be also shares some other traits like poverty or lack of education. I'm sure you're familiar with the narrative of socio-economic environment and afroamericans.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/274292.php

A small minority of people (2.4%) expressed some sympathy for violent protest and terrorism, whilst over 6% remained neutral - i.e., they did not show sympathies but nor did they condemn such acts. However, sympathy levels increased among those under 20, those in full time education rather than employment, those born in the UK, and high earners (£75,000 per year or more).

Interestingly, migrants and those speaking a language other than English at home, and those who reported having poor physical health, were all less likely to show sympathies for terrorist acts. In addition, those who reported suffering from anxiety and depression were no more likely to display sympathies, provoking some new research questions about the relationship between radicalisation and mental health.

Really now?

[Deleted]

so moral grandstanding AKA "virtue signaling" combined with not actually stopping the violence but helping facilitate more of it.... makes total fuckin sense brah... to you anyway.

Killing the terrorists, blacklisting Islamism, and strong condemnation of Islamism from both sides is my solution. Your solution is pacism and appeasement. Not only is it cowardly to appease evil, it is a threat to our entire way of life.

[Freighter]

Does " remember remember the 5th of November" mean anything to you?

Guy Fawkes?

[Jastall]

You didn't mention the biggest factor, their Muslim parents brainwashing them.

Whatever you say. But from what I've read it's very uncommon that the parents are actually behind such things, in part because refugees tend to be less radical as they wish to actually leave their country. Whereas their children are more open to bad influences.

[Deleted]

Unless you're going to start advocating censorship, you can't stop those ideas from entering your country.

We can stop people who possess those ideals from entering my country. We can probably stop those ideals from taking as strong of a hold if we ALL stand against them. If we stop coddling theocrats. If we tell them strongly that they are wrong. And we can kill and destroy the terrorists that plan, support, and enable these attacks on our people. We can blacklist Islamist organizations from doing business with our country (as we did to communists in the past).

I'm entirely against censorship. I don't compromise on my ideals.

[Sharein]

There's a difference between engaging and tackling an issue and thinking that the correct response to anger, hate and rage is more anger hate and rage.

Appeasing is the stupidest thing you can do against a masculine culture.

[Deleted]

His name has been dropped.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...als/ar-BBBsn9Z



Oh look, he's not an immigrant.

So what if he was an immigrant? If his parents hadn't immigrated to Britain this would have never have happened.

[Sky High]

Killing the terrorists, blacklisting Islamism, and strong condemnation of Islamism from both sides is my solution. Your solution is pacism and appeasement. Not only is it cowardly to appease evil, it is a threat to our entire way of life.

no, MY approach is to actually help solve the problem, YOU just happen to think it's appeasement. the appeasement part is cutting multi billion dollar weapons deals with those radical Islamic terrorist FUCKS over in Saudi Arabia who not only use those weapons to help commit genocide against people living in Yemen but also give that money to fund radical mosques in Europe. so when a terrorist attack happens you throw your arms up and go "lets kill the symptoms, but not the disease!" also this fantasy you have where you think you can stamp out an ideology with force, that'll NEVER happen.

[Deleted]

I mean if this were a decision I had to make, I'd be consulting with experts on the subject to determine a long term strategy. I know what things I don't consider acceptable–broad expansion of government authority or other things that undermine the very rights and values we're supposedly trying to protect–but I'd hardly claim I have the answer to the problem right now. Similarly, I don't generally believe any random person who wants to play armchair policy expert and I interpret virtually all of these posts as expressions of mere feeling, rather than suggestions based in any even remotely sensible thinking. What I do know is that if people want lasting change, they probably need to make these people prosperous in a more worldly sense, as prosperity makes people fat, lazy, and complacent in a hurry. Blowing yourself up probably seems a lot less enticing when you're leading a life of comfort and convenience.

In the mean time, it's fine to defend yourself, but you can't let fear and hatred cause you to sacrifice the very thing you're afraid of losing. Neither ISIS nor any other terrorist organization is capable of winning a conventional war with the Western world. Terrorism doesn't work because it's good at conquering, but because people are stupid and easily frightened and will give up virtually anything they need to so that they don't have to be. ISIS just has to poke Europe until Europe decides to sacrifice everything that makes Europe worth defending. If people don't keep that in mind, it will just hasten the process.

You are a formidable poster when removed from the bickering.
I often struggle to put into words the bolded, which is pretty much what I think in a very general sense. It's a hard sell, given how nowadays people like to insist on bootstraps, no-hand-outs, and protect-at-all-costs policies.

[Freighter]

Unless you're going to start advocating censorship, you can't stop those ideas from entering your country.

In the present-time world it's next to impossible to censor ideas. So, censorship would likely not help. It would just annoy people.

[Sharein]

Unless you're going to start advocating censorship, you can't stop those ideas from entering your country.

Sure we can.

Cut their funding, blacklist radical imams and organizations and disallow them access to our countries, crack down harder on people supporting terrorism through (for example) facebook messages and forums and provide proper unbiased education.

Just make it unattractive for radicals to come here and impossible to get a footing.

[purebalance]

The OP started out by assuming it was Muslims, but that bit has since been removed by the mods. Several other people did as well before there was even any information that made it clear it was likely a terrorist attack, since the early information only talked about reports of explosions and made it clear it wasn't certain if there were actually explosions or just loud noises.

And yet... shocker... it was. Your ranting is worthless because your "let's not jump to conclusions" was just to try to eventually be "ha I told you so and you're racist". We all knew what it was.

[Sharein]

What I do know is that if people want lasting change, they probably need to make these people prosperous in a more worldly sense, as prosperity makes people fat, lazy, and complacent in a hurry. Blowing yourself up probably seems a lot less enticing when you're leading a life of comfort and convenience.

How do you suggest we do this?

[Deleted]

no, MY approach is to actually help solve the problem, YOU just happen to think it's appeasement. the appeasement part is cutting multi billion dollar weapons deals with those radical Islamic terrorist FUCKS over in Saudi Arabia who not only use those weapons to help commit genocide against people living in Yemen but also give that money to fund radical mosques in Europe. so when a terrorist attack happens you throw your arms up and go "lets kill the symptoms, but not the disease!"also this fantasy you have where you think you can stamp out an ideology with force, that'll NEVER happen.

We destroy the source of the ideology with force. The rest is done with witholding money, assimilation, and condemnation. And I agree, giving money to countries who sponsor terror is apart of the problem.

[Templar 331]

So what if he was an immigrant? If his parents hadn't immigrated to Britain this would have never have happened.

I said he's not an immigrant. And what does his parents being immigrants have to do with anything?

[purebalance]

His name has been dropped.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...als/ar-BBBsn9Z



Oh look, he's not an immigrant.

Libyan muslim born to immigrant parents(not refugee). Pretty sure he's exactly what people are talking about still.

[Deleted]

But that doesn't stop those ideas from spreading to people in the country, which has been a significant portion of the incidents people are all worked up about. I'm fairly confident we're not exactly letting people in who we know express desires to attack us as it stands. I doubt European countries are any different. Regardless, you're not going to stop everyone who does have those ideas from getting in, unless you try to just ban everyone who is Muslim. Even then, lying isn't difficult. You'd probably also start pushing even normal Muslims more towards radicalism if you confirm that the US is opposed to Islam in its entirety.

You need a better game plan than holding hands and singing kumbaya while giving Islamism the stink eye. Despite all the claims to the contrary, we haven't exactly been going easy on it and it still isn't really working.

Opposed to Islamism. Not Islam. Sadly, only Muslims can be Islamist. Therefore the solution to halting the spread of Islamism is by blocking people from Islamist countries from immigrating to the United States. I don't care about their religion, I'm simply against the political aspect of it.

And you're right. I'm not planning on holding hands. I think we should kill and destroy the radical Islamists. Simultaneously we need to stop appeasing/coddling/apologizing to people who are more "moderate" Islamists. We need to blacklist all political Islam from doing business with our country. And yes, we must halt the flow of people that support Islamism. They're a threat to our people and our way of life. No more appeasing.

[Sky High]

We destroy the source of the ideology with force. The rest is done with witholding money, assimilation, and condemnation. And I agree, giving money to countries who sponsor terror is apart of the problem.

you can never kill an idea. we killed Hitler over 70 years ago and we STILL have people who believe in his message running around. its a farce to even try, and you only give them an excuse to keep trying.