Liverpool terror attack

[oldius]

The west wants to scrap around looking for reasons, trying to understand, looking at why we are to blame - what can we do that will make the next would be terrorist stop. But these terrorists simply don’t give any justification for their actions - nothing - if you catch them in one piece it’s usually to the sound of “allah is great” or something similar not “this for the 40 slaughtered at a wedding”. I think only ISIS have said they want the death of all infidels or something equally genocidal.

Scrapping around and doing nothing is no solution.

 

[metalblue]

I can't speak for individual groups or lone wolves but moving towards resolving the issues I raise would be a start. What isn't so complex is that if UK manufactured bombs are used to destroy a village, or maim a family, someone will justify retaliation in the UK. Just dismissing terrorists without any attempt to understand their actions is doomed to failure and more mayhem.

You can’t understand that that does not speak.

Just guessing why they might be doing things without any dialog is doomed to failure and more mayhem.

 

[metalblue]

Scrapping around and doing nothing is no solution.

Nor is guessing

 

[Lovebitesandeveryfing]

Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?
I am not defending our or Americas foreign policy, the invasion of Iraq was a war crime but the terrorists are very selective in who they target, i.e. the west. It us a political cause rather than religious or retaliation.

If by “targeted” you mean singled out for condemnation, they most certainly are targeted. The very fact that you and I both know that that is going on is in itself proof.
If on the other hand you expect western or NATO forces to do anything about those utterly reprehensible crimes, or even the governments they represent to riposte with sanctions, well of course they don't give a damn, basically. Western strategic and economic interests are not threatened by anything that's happening to either the Uyghurs in Xinjiang or the Muslims in Myanmar. And that, precisely, is the point.

 

[oldius]

You can’t understand that that does not speak.

Just guessing why they might be doing things without any dialog is doomed to failure and more mayhem.

Our views are opposed but we are speaking and that is how commonality is found. There is enough evidence out there that our foreign policy is, at times, inflammatory but we also hear of terrorist acts from multiple groups and lone wolves all over the globe and the chance of stopping all attacks is next to zero.

 

[BigJoe#1]

You've sort of answered your own question by the way you posited the question.

Having to add a caveat that you haven't got a racist agenda by asking why this person hasn't been deported yet when it's a perfectly reasonable question.

Thanks, it's an interesting point you raise (about my caveat) which I find hard to explain.

I think there are those who would shout RACIST simply because I raise the question and I wanted to avoid that - because I'm not (or at least I don't consider myself to be one). However, it is a genuine question that needs to be asked and answered. Is it a case that there is massive incompetence at play or what? But how could he survive? I understand once the asylum request is denied the requester cannot work. I would also hope that they would not be entitled to receive any benefits, but some how I strongly suspect this is not the case.

 

[Corky]

Thanks, it's an interesting point you raise (about my caveat) which I find hard to explain.

I think there are those who would shout RACIST simply because I raise the question and I wanted to avoid that - because I'm not (or at least I don't consider myself to be one). However, it is a genuine question that needs to be asked and answered. Is it a case that there is massive incompetence at play or what? But how could he survive? I understand once the asylum request is denied the requester cannot work. I would also hope that they would not be entitled to receive any benefits, but some how I strongly suspect this is not the case.

If an asylum seeker gets a negative decision they have right to appeal, but once they have exhausted appeals they are supposed to leave as they have no right to remain and don't have any recourse to public funds and can't work. Whilst they are awaiting a decision they also don't have recourse to public funds and can't work, but they are normally housed in a private property provided by an "outsourcing company" on behalf of the Home Office with a very modest allowance on their ASPEN cards.

If they get a positive decision they become a refugee with leave to remain and they lose their accommodation within 28 days, but do have recourse to public funds.

 

[BigJoe#1]

If an asylum seeker gets a negative decision they have right to appeal, but once they have exhausted appeals they are supposed to leave as they have no right to remain and don't have any recourse to public funds and can't work. Whilst they are awaiting a decision they also don't have recourse to public funds and can't work, but they are normally housed in a private property provided by an "outsourcing company" on behalf of the Home Office with a very modest allowance on their ASPEN cards.

If they get a positive decision they become a refugee with leave to remain and they lose their accommodation within 28 days, but do have recourse to public funds.

Thanks, though in light of you answer, the question about why he was still here after 7 years still remains in my mind.

 

[Blue Mist]

“Gross human rights violations, including what could amount to war crimes, are being committed throughout the country.”
- Amnesty International

90 unlawful air strikes is a specific example if you want one.

It is far more complicated than short paragraphs from Amnesty who by the way are mired in their own shit storm.
Terrorists in Yemen who are trained by and financially supported by Iran are trying to seize the country. Effectively Iran is fighting a proxy war similar to what they are doing in Iraq and Syria.
Iran and the Yemini terrorists are Shia Muslim. Yemen and Saudi are Shia Muslim.
The Yemini insurgents are causing huge suffering to civilians, they have refused to allow neutral humanitarian aid to starving people. They are fighting and hiding in civilian areas which often leads to innocent people dying.
Some western press want to paint the Saudis as the aggressors which size isn't true.

 

[Blue Mist]

The west wants to scrap around looking for reasons, trying to understand, looking at why we are to blame - what can we do that will make the next would be terrorist stop. But these terrorists simply don’t give any justification for their actions - nothing - if you catch them in one piece it’s usually to the sound of “allah is great” or something similar not “this for the 40 slaughtered at a wedding”. I think only ISIS have said they want the death of all infidels or something equally genocidal.

That does not explain why we are targeted rather than the Burmese. It is my belief that we are targeted due to politics rather than any religious ideology.