Europe moves up to #1 on Bin Laden's Hit List

[thrila]

This may be of interest to some: it is a document of IRA terrorist incidents between 1980 and 1996.  Terrorism is by no means a new thing to europe. Dowding has a very good point, if tony blairs government did anything good it was to talk to the IRA.  http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199596/cmhansrd/vo960304/text/60304w13.htm

[Lumpy]

European nations have been fighting a clandestine "war" with radical Islam (and on occasion open war against Islam itself) since biblical times. Islamic terrorism may be a new thing in the New World, but in the Old World it is old news. AlQ may try something big, and may even succeed, but they won't change who we are and how we live our lives. The Madrid and London bombings are fine examples of that.

[lazs2]

so the best way to deal with it is to sit and take it and pretend it doesn't matter and..   make a lot of concessions along the way?

you could be right.. they may just go away in time.

lazs

[bj229r]

What you guys fail to realise is that in EU a major amount of the population is arabic, kind of like you guys have Mexicans in the US. Consequently, we have to be carefull of what we are doing military speaking. Imagine USA sending troops in Mexico, you'll start a massive riot that would be prety destructive for your backyard. Same stuff with us.

Otherwise, nothing new there, US was still in dreamland when we were getting our subways bombed once a week. Armed soldiers in train/subways/airports is comon sight for over 15 years in EU.

as far as France not setting foot in Afganistan, a quick Google would educate
http://www.ambafrance-ca.org/spip.php?article1328
http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/France-steps-up-its-military.html

Read that, good article--France has a few hundred special forces guys helping train the Afghanis, in addition to other types troops here and there---that is what folks don't understand---it's not like the US has tons fewer guys in Afghanistan because of Iraq--Afghanistan was always envisioned as a S.F.-type operation--a few well-trained guys here and there working closely with local tribal leaders. Throwing 100,000 guys at the problem can't do what these small groups of S.F. guys are doing (I THINK the USSR tried that approach, no worky too well)  The ultimate fix for Afghanistan is to squish all the Bin Laden wannabes living in the mountainous border regions of Pakistan, but some of the altitudes are so high that helicopters can barely operate there, and more importantly, it's on Pakistan's side of the border, and many folks seem to get their panties in a wad we we stomp into other folks' countries. (Last I read, Pakistan lost 600 of their OWN best soldiers trying to clean out this area at the US's behest....they don't go in there any more)

[cpxxx]

The voice of 'Bin Laden' is merely sabre rattling.

Before 9/11 the US had very few domestic terrorist incidents, since 9/11 there has hasn't been a terrorist attack in the USA.

Meanwhile in Europe and the rest of the world have had ongoing terrorism on their doorstep in one form or another for many many years. Nothing new there.  Europeans also learned from experience that gung ho, 'Die Hard' style, all guns blazing attempts to defeat terrorists didn't work.

Terrorists are defeated not in pitched battles but by carefully isolating them from potential supporters by relieving genuine grievances.

If you want an example of how that worked, you only have to look at Iraq. One of the reasons for improved security is taking former Sunni terrorists and bringing them onside. This isolated Al Qaeda. America has re-learned this lesson the hard way. These Sunnis were once killing Americans, now they are on the payroll.

This method lack the glory of firefights but it works.

The IRA is another good example of how to deal with terrorism. A big difference though is that the IRA had a genuine cause and were culturally the same. 'Bin Laden' seeks only the destruction of all the entire western civilisation AND all muslims who do not conform to his twisted worldview. You cannot negotiate with that. All you can do is to try and keep a lid on it and attempt to remove the reason some Muslims rally to his cause. Without support, he is merely an old man ranting in the desert.

[angelsandair]

Well you see, Europe is just a short drive away or boat ride away from the Middle east. The USA is alot harder to get to and into. So they will probably attack the easier targets first. Plus, they have had planned plenty of terrorist attacks, we just got to them first.

[bj229r]

snip----- So they will probably attack the easier targets first.----snip---

That would be, women and children

[Brownshirt]

Just few decades ago we killed millions of our own people; I hope people in middle-east remember that little thing...

[Elfie]

European nations have been fighting a clandestine "war" with radical Islam (and on occasion open war against Islam itself) since biblical times.

That is incorrect. Islam didn't exist during Biblical times. The entire Bible had been written for centuries before Muhammed came along and started Islam.

[Lumpy]

That may be so, but I must point out a few oversights on your part:

1. "Biblical times" is generally considered to end in the Japhethic time period of of the 5th century with the Ladocia Council's arranged Canon of the Old and New Testament. Prior to that the "Bible" was just separate gospels or incomplete collections of gospels.

2. The prophet Mohammed lived in the 6th century.

3. The first open war between Islam and Christianity/Judaism was in the 7th century beginning with the Islamic conquest of Jerusalem.

3. The word "since" in the English language means: "in the period after a specified time in the past" (Merriam-Webster).

[Elfie]

Biblical times would be the time periods during which the Bible was written, not after it was written.

Definition of Biblical:
1.  Of, relating to, or contained in the Bible.
2. Being in keeping with the nature of the Bible, especially:
a. Suggestive of the personages or times depicted in the Bible.
b. Suggestive of the prose or narrative style of the King James Bible.
3. Very great in extent; enormous: a natural disaster of near biblical proportions.


The Council of Laodicea did not outline the Bible as we have it today. Specifically, it omitted the book of Revelation and added the Book of Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy. Revelation is part of today's Bible and the other 2 are not.

The Apostle John wrote the last book of the Bible, Revelation while on the Isle of Patmos. While it can be debated on when all of the books of the Bible as we know it today were compiled into one book, all of the books in the Bible as we know it were written long before the 6th century.

The first official meeting of churches which listed the twenty-seven books of the New Testament was the Synod of Hippo in 393. Later the Third Synod of Carthage affirmed the canonization of the 27 books of the New Testament in 397.

Furthermore, the Apostles Peter and Paul were already referring to books as Scripture that would later be acknowledged as part of the Canon by the aforementioned Synods. (The Apostles Peter and Paul lived while Christ was still alive. As did the Apostle John who wrote The Gospel according to John, the 3 epistles of John and the book of Revelation.)

Even if we go with when the Synods affirmed the Canon, it is still 2 centuries before Muhammed and 3 before any wars between Islamic forces and Judaeo/Christian forces.

[Elfie]

I forgot this part in my previous post:

Definition of the word since:

1.  From then until now or between then and now: They left town and haven't been here since.
2. Before now; ago: a name long since forgotten.
3. After some point in the past; at a subsequent time: My friend has since married and moved to California.
prep.
1. Continuously from: They have been friends since childhood.
2. Intermittently from: She's been skiing since childhood.
conj.
1. During the period subsequent to the time when: He hasn't been home since he graduated.
2. Continuously from the time when: They have been friends ever since they were in grade school.
3. Inasmuch as; because: Since you're not interested, I won't tell you about it.

European nations have been fighting a clandestine "war" with radical Islam (and on occasion open war against Islam itself) since biblical times.

The definition in bold is how your statement I quoted reads to me.

[Elfie]

Ladocia Council's arranged Canon of the Old and New Testament

The Old Testament had already been arranged as the Scriptures before Christ came to earth. Christ himself referred to the Old Testament writings as Scriptures.

Apologies for 3 posts to answer one, it's late and I forgot to reply to various parts that I had intended to reply to.

[Elfie]

Oh crap, forgot one more thing. 

Just to clarify an earlier statement: (While it can be debated on when all of the books of the Bible as we know it today were compiled into one book)

People (Other than the Apostles) were referring to various books as Scripture (that were later affirmed by both the Synod of Hippo and the Third Synod of Carthage) as early as 95 AD.

Ok, I think I am really done now. 

[Lumpy]

If that is how it reads to you then I have to rephrase my earlier statement to the following: European nations have been fighting a clandestine "war" with radical Islam (and on occasion open war against Islam itself) 89% of the time past since biblical times.

And yes ... you really are more pedantic than me (which is a feat).