This ideology is a broad one, also known as Salafism or seen a form of literal ism. It's not right to say all or most people who follow this ideology or something similar to it will advocate acts of terrorism, killing of innocent people. Many don't even believe in a self proclaimed Islamic State. There are some who follow this school of thought who will have ideas of conquest and self rule through any means, believing they are right. But the leaders of almost all groups in the middle east are criminals or paid mercenaries by states. Saudia Arabia is indeed one of these where and it is the main exporter of what you call the dangerous ideology. You can't miss this crucial point because it's known who put them into power and who has been protecting them ever since.
OK, I don't accept the radicalisation conveyor belt theory either (and neither do Quilliam).
I also accept that Muslims have allowed themselves to be ruled by despots in many lands. If I felt that the literalists were actual liberators I might support them, but they appear to be despots of another stripe. Do you believe that the Muslim Brotherhood are freedom fighters?
Their foriegn policy towards the middle east since WW1 has been wrong and is responsible for pretty much all the mess we see now.Of course there are others to take the blame but this is the primary root cause of what we see now.
I accept the foreign policy disasters since 1918. How would you mend it?
The Indian cities is just strawman, nothing to do with this subject.
I think you are calling it a strawman because it doesn't jibe with your West-responsible-for-everything-bad belief. My point was that some Muslims carry out atrocity in places which the West is not interested in so post-colonialist interference cannot be entirely to blame.
She acknowledges there was a threat there previously but stresses the actions of 2003 """""The invasion of Iraq "substantially" increased the terrorist threat to the UK, the former head of MI5 has said.
Giving evidence to the Iraq inquiry, Baroness Manningham-Buller said the action had radicalised "a few among a generation".
As a result, she said she was not "surprised" that UK nationals were involved in the 7/7 bombings in London."""""
OK and I agree with her, but that is the reverse of what you posted in #33.
Libya was a manufactured revolution to over throw Gaddafi, the same groups then turned to Syria. Before this both nations were stable and relatively peaceful. Funding groups and intervening in these countries hasn't just turned the countries into hell holes, it was and is a deliberate effort to destroy them.
Seems unlikely. Gaddafi was back in the fold, he was no longer using the Med as his boating lake, was not exporting terrorism and was trading with the Western nations. I don't know why the French led the charge to help overthrow him with airstrikes, but if they had not we would have another Syria to this day.
Russia and other world nations can see and so can the people which is why you are seeing liberal anti war leaders springing up all over western nations. I hope you will be voting for Corbyn Robert.
You are upholding Russia as a peacemaker? Come now. They are propping up the murderous al-Assad regime for their own ends, no different to the US relationship with Israel and Saudi.
As a lifelong Labour voter, I'll vote Tory to keep Corbyn out of power. He's an intellectual pygmy with thirty years' experience of not supporting his party leader and therefore no has idea how to unite his own party, let alone run a country. But his own party will depose him before 2020.
) at guys who think so.
