Nice and ongoing terror attacks in W Europe

droid

Well-known member
Im either an obscenely fair minded commentator who gives credit where its due despite past transgressions, or I'm massaging your flesh so the lashes leave deeper wounds when they fall.

You decide!
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Belgium and Sweden possibly motivated by a general dislike for the secular West

Well that's just my point. Targetting those countries only makes sense if you buy into the grand apocalyptic vision of "Islam" vs "The West" - i.e. the vision shared by hard-right, war-happy lunatics in the West and the Islamists themselves.

The repeated attacks in the UK and France very likely bc of direct military involvement.

It's true that France is part of the CJTF in Syria, but let's not overestimate the role played by American and European forces in a conflict that is being overwhelmingly waged by the Syrian government and its Iranian and Russian backers against an amorphous and constantly shifting Opposition, which notionally comprises ISIS and other Islamist groups as well as non-Islamist rebel factions but has been enlarged in definition to include much of the country's civilian population.

And for years many people tried to explain Islamist terrorism in Europe with the single word "Iraq", which may have had some traction in the UK and Spain but certainly doesn't apply to France.

St. Petersburg Bombing just happened a few weeks ago. And in Iran - it's a Shiite country.

The bombing in Russia is the only one, recently, that I've heard of. I'm contrasting that to the fact that Russia has far more direct military involvement in Syria, and has killed (and is killing) far more Muslims there, than all Western countries put together.

Iran has a substantial Sunni minority - a bigger proportion than the total Muslim population of most Western European countries. And these are people with no particular reason to love the present regime either on a domestic front or in terms of Iran's support of Assad in Syria.

Of course, it could just be that it's far easier to catch would-be jihadis before they can carry out an attack in a country with an ultra-authoritarian regime and no regard for civil liberties and human rights.
 

droid

Well-known member
And for years many people tried to explain Islamist terrorism in Europe with the single word "Iraq", which may have had some traction in the UK and Spain but certainly doesn't apply to France.

Still true - not in terms of motivation necessarily, but in terms of origin. Afghanistan gave us Bin laden, Iraq gave us widespread global Islamist terror.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
And for years many people tried to explain Islamist terrorism in Europe with the single word "Iraq", which may have had some traction in the UK and Spain but certainly doesn't apply to France.

Which shows certain people's ignorance of the matter, in the mid 1990s there were Terror attacks carried out by the "Armed Islamic Group" (repeated bombings of the paris Metro, plane highjacking). Reason: French invovlement in Algeria. There'S quite a tradition of France being Islamists' target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Islamic_Group_of_Algeria

The bombing in Russia is the only one, recently, that I've heard of. I'm contrasting that to the fact that Russia has far more direct military involvement in Syria, and has killed (and is killing) far more Muslims there, than all Western countries put together.

You'll see more like this. Islamist terror attacks have happened in the past in Russia repeatedly, connected with the war in Chechnya, the most brutal one in 2004 (schoolkids held hostages in Beslan)

Of course, it could just be that it's far easier to catch would-be jihadis before they can carry out an attack in a country with an ultra-authoritarian regime and no regard for civil liberties and human rights.

That's very likey the case
 
Last edited:

droid

Well-known member
Which shows certain people's ignorance of the matter, in the mid 1990s there were Terror attacks carried out by the "Armed Islamic Group" (repeated bombings of the paris Metor, plane highjacking). Reason: French invovlement in Algeria. There'S quite a tradition of France being Islamists' target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Islamic_Group_of_Algeria

AIG attacks on France were not even vaguely religiously motivated, as you say, they were specifically aimed at curtailing France's involvement in the Algerian civil war.

You'll see more like this. Islamist terror attacks have happened in the past in Russia repeatedly, connected with the war in Chechnya, the most brutal one in 2004 (schoolkids held hostages in Beslan)

Again, Beslan was not an 'Islamist' attack by any credible definition of the term. It was an extension of the vicious nationalist conflict of the 2nd Chechnyan war.

The right has consistently argued that Islamist terror is entirely nihilistic and motivated only by religion, whereas virtually all attacks prior to Iraq, going back to Palestinian spectaculars of the 1970's were motivated by specific political situations.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Still true - not in terms of motivation necessarily, but in terms of origin. Afghanistan gave us Bin laden, Iraq gave us widespread global Islamist terror.

Yes, Iraq sparked it off, and it's since metastasized into something very nebulous, for which countries that are innocent of the Iraq disaster are now sadly paying the price.
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
just heard theresa may talking about it being an attack on the free world. then read a guardian article with ariana grande fans talking about side to side as being a perfect way to piss isis off. lol.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Again, Beslan was not an 'Islamist' attack by any credible definition of the term. It was an extension of the vicious nationalist conflict of the 2nd Chechnyan war.

Yeah, you wouldn't really call the Chechen separatist militants "Islamists" any more than you'd call the IRA "Catholic fundamentalists".
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
when was the last time a terrorist stated their ideological/political aims after an attack? or is it just that isis are stating it, but media wont report it? cos im confused as to whether people like the saturday night attacks actually have an agenda, no matter how faulty it is. i know isis' basic objectives, i.e the total fantasy of establishing a caliphate, to eradicate the non believers, the bad muslims, and the bad everyone-else, but i find it peculiar that for all their claiming of these attacks, i never hear much about the point behind them, apart from just to instill fear and chaos into society, a claim usually stated by a politician, presumably to get us to understand the position we are meant to assume.

this is prob discussed already, but i was reminded of it again when listening to radio 4 this morning. the whole mentally ill thing vs ideology thing is when its a muslim terrorist, the mental health angle isnt often commented on, its always the fear of their ideology, their beliefs, their culture, their religion, whereas when its some nutjob like thomas mair, no one wants to investigate the ideology behind his thinking, its just dismissal of him as a one off loon. sort of like when you hear muslim clerics saying isis arent anything to do with muslim. well yes, theyre not really religious, but its not like they have no connection to it either.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I remember a fuckton of people wanting to investigate the ideology of Thomas Mair - or at any rate, pointing out that he very obviously had one, with clearly articulated values and aims. I mean, it didn't even take that much in the way of 'investigation' - the guy associated with the National Alliance, was obsessed with the Nazis and KKK and yelled "Britain First!" while he attacked Jo Cox.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
That's not to say the guy doesn't have a screw loose as well, obviously. Though no doubt you could say the same about many of the perps of these recent Islamist (or quasi-Islamist or para-Islamist) attacks.

And yeah, the whole "ISIS aren't Muslims" line is getting really fucking tired now. Muslims are the new Scotsmen, it would seem.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I saw the news about the Iran attack. Maybe ISIS reads Dissensus? :eek:

On another note, the title of this thread takes on a whole new meaning if you interpret "Nice" as rhyming with "rice".
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
From that a-J article:

Feuding field commanders and foreign jihadists, such as the Saudi known as Emir al-Khattab, ruled small districts with their own little armies. Kidnappings for ransom - along with primitive extraction of oil - were their main sources of income.

Many of the foreigners adhered to a puritanical Muslim ideology known as Wahhabism that ran counter to Chechnya's Sufi traditions.

Akhmad Kadyrov, who was appointed as top Mufti of Chechnya, came into opposition with the puritans and their Chechen supporters, because he saw their extremist views as a threat to the separatist movement. In 1998, Kadyrov openly renounced the Wahhabis - and barely survived the first of many assassination attempts.

I don't know a great deal about the Chechnya conflict, but it sounds like an instance of what Olivier Roy calls the Islamisation of radicalism.
 

Leo

Well-known member
white guy shoots and kills 58/injures 500 in las vegas and police rule out terrorism because, ya know, he's a white guy.

shooters "inspired by ISIS" are deemed terrorists; shooters inspired by racism/nationalism/general hatred etc. are depicted as "a lone wolf", a "local resident", probably had mental issues, etc.

and like clockwork, conservatives in congress and the NRA wheel out their "thoughts and prayers to the victims' families" and my personal favorite: "now is not the time to talk about gun control" lines.

what a fucking disgusting situation.

EDIT: not in western europe but didn't feel like starting a whole other thread for this one...
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Ugh, fuck knows. I guess technically it isn't terrorism if there isn't an ideological motive beyond "I hate everyone and everything"? But perhaps he'll yet turn out to have left some pathetic fucking 'manifesto', as they so often do.

Edit: having said that, Dylann Roof had a political agenda that couldn't have been more explicit, and some cunts quibbled about calling him a terrorist even then.

It boggles the mind to think that people can continue to defend the USA's gun laws when shit like this happens again, and again, and again, and again...
 
Last edited:
Top