Shots fired outside Houses of Parliament

[ferrelhadley]

To understand the existence, and attraction, of ISIS, one has to look at the sorry sequence of events since the invasion of Iraq.

Germany opposed the Iraq invasion yet faced the Breitscheidplatz attack. France has faced the most terror attacks of a western European country yet also refused to get involved in Iraq. These attacks are not picking the best locations to hit out at those who are attacking "Muslim" countries, i.e. US bases. They are not launching attacks at the decision making infrastructure of western liberal democracy. They have attacked rock concerts, Jewish shops, cartoonists and randoms on the streets.

This is not a coherent campaign but one that strikes at the easiest targets (physically) then pins on rationalisations. This is atrocity spectacle for the sake of atrocity spectacle, not political goals.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I am not sure how true that is, though whether IS would have come about without the invasion and corralling of them all in the US-led prison system is another matter. Takfiri groups are invariably forces of reaction, not of revolution or liberation.

The ideas gain traction in the presence of a foreign occupying force. As the roots of Al-qaeda come from the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Foreign occupation, or the perception of it, is a common thread to groups that produce many extreme forms of terrorism. Nationalism of whatever kind, and I would see IS as a form of nationalism, plus powerlessness produces the required desperation.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Germany opposed the Iraq invasion yet faced the Breitscheidplatz attack. France has faced the most terror attacks of a western European country yet also refused to get involved in Iraq. These attacks are not picking the best locations to hit out at those who are attacking "Muslim" countries, i.e. US bases. They are not launching attacks at the decision making infrastructure of western liberal democracy. They have attacked rock concerts, Jewish shops, cartoonists and randoms on the streets.

This is not a coherent campaign but one that strikes at the easiest targets (physically) then pins on rationalisations. This is atrocity spectacle for the sake of atrocity spectacle, not political goals.

Yep. The desperation produced in the aftermath of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan has created a wide-ranging, unfocused response. That doesn't mean the conditions in which this desperation was produced are not directly traceable back to those invasions and events surrounding them.

I don't agree, however, that IS has no political goal in its sponsorship of terrorism. I think it very clearly does have one.

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

Yeh. If you ignore centuries of Irish rebellions and Irish constitutionalism

If you ignore the land war, the economic war, the tan war and so on

If you ignore the political and historical context, yeh there's a very definite connection

You talk big, but I reckon you're all talk.

When I say all talk, I mean uncommonly rude.

 

[mojo pixy]

Psssst ... it's a internests forum. It's all talk

 

[ferrelhadley]

Yep. The desperation produced in the aftermath of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan has created#

Has it.

Someone drove a truck into a group of German Christmas shoppers because of Iraq. Your evidence is well, you want it to be true.
These atrocities are fulfilling your desire for karma to be visited upon the invaders of Iraq. All the evidence of motivation you need. Even if the Germans had little to do with it.
So why have these heroes not been attacking the US or US armed forces personnel?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Has it.

Someone drove a truck into a group of German Christmas shoppers because of Iraq. Your evidence is well, you want it to be true.
These atrocities are fulfilling your desire for karma to be visited upon the invaders of Iraq. All the evidence of motivation you need. Even if the Germans had little to do with it.
So why have these heroes not been attacking the US or US armed forces personnel?

The conditions that have allowed extremist groups such as IS to develop and cohere have roots in the invasion of Iraq and the devastation, resentment and political and civil chaos it created. The conditions for desperation and extremism.

Nothing to do with 'my desire for karma'. And if you think I'm cheering any of this, you've entirely misread me.

 

[ferrelhadley]

The conditions that have allowed extremist groups such as IS to develop and cohere have roots in the invasion of Iraq

 

[Pickman's model]

The conditions that have allowed extremist groups such as IS to develop and cohere have roots in the invasion of Iraq and the devastation, resentment and political and civil chaos it created. The conditions for desperation and extremism.

Nothing to do with 'my desire for karma'. And if you think I'm cheering any of this, you've entirely misread me.

So they only go back to 2003. Even for an effete and ineffectual liberal that's very poor. At least back as far as 1945, probably auld sykes-picot

 

[J Ed]

The IRA got wise to the fact that causing economic damage would get more leverage than shooting the occasional squaddie. The Jihadis haven't figured that one out yet.

That's because Al-Qaeda, and now ISIS, have very different strategies and long terms goals to the IRA. ISIS in particular are very explicit about wanting to eliminate the 'grey zone' between them and an anti-Muslim interventionist West, they want pogroms against Muslims in the West so that Muslims turn against Western countries and vice versa.

The IRA wanted Britain out of Northern Ireland, not the Irish out of Britain.

 

[J Ed]

So they only go back to 2003. Even for an effete and ineffectual liberal that's very poor. At least back as far as 1945, probably auld sykes-picot

Mark Curtis very convincingly traces the roots of modern day Islamist terrorism back to the formation Deobandi groups in opposition to the British Raj in the 1910s. Britain allowed very conservative, extreme versions of Islam to flourish in British India as a way of satisfying the demands of fanatics who they feared would otherwise respond favourably to the Ottoman Empire's calls for Muslims within the British Empire to rise up against it.

 

[Pickman's model]

Mark Curtis very convincingly traces the roots of modern day Islamist terrorism back to the formation Deobandi groups in opposition to the British Raj in the 1910s. Britain allowed very conservative, extreme versions of Islam to flourish in British India as a way of satisfying the demands of fanatics who they feared would otherwise respond favourably to the Ottoman Empire's calls for Muslims within the British Empire to rise up against it.

Yeh. A mite further back than 2003 then.

 

[J Ed]

Yeh. A mite further back than 2003 then.

Actually before 1910 and back into the 19th Century iirc

 

[J Ed]

I seriously recommend Curtis' Secret Affairs on this subject, absolutely essential reading for understanding British foreign policy and also the contemporary Middle-East.

 

[bi0boy]

You could probably blame the vikings if you wanted.

 

[Pickman's model]

You could probably blame the vikings if you wanted.

On the grounds that...

 

[ferrelhadley]

Mark Curtis very convincingly traces the roots of modern day Islamist terrorism back to the formation Deobandi groups in opposition to the British Raj in the 1910s.

Fascinating. So Wahhabism started in India in 1910. The things you learn from people who always see the same "narrative" in everything.

Who needs complexity when all of history reduces to such simple moral tales.

 

[J Ed]

Fascinating. So Wahhabism started in India in 1910. The things you learn from people who always see the same "narrative" in everything.

Who needs complexity when all of history reduces to such simple moral tales.

I didn't say that Salafism started in India in 1910, probably would be more correct to say that the sort of modern form of political Islam we see today, which has many offshoots many less unpleasant than ISIS, started in 19th Century British India. There is also of course some difference between Deobandi Islam and Salafism, but the two share a great deal in common, the Taliban were Deobandi for example and were quite happy to work with Salafist Al-Qaeda. Both doctrines recognise each other as being correct.

 

[green.tea]

According to Curtis's Hypernormalisation the Muslim suicide bomber has it's roots in the Americans double crossing Assad senior, leading to re-interpretation of Islamic texts to encourage suicide bombing. Which is interesting because it shows Islam as a mechanism of direct manipulation, rather than a static ideology. Presumably it could be re-interpreted back again.

 

[mather]

Fascinating. So Wahhabism started in India in 1910. The things you learn from people who always see the same "narrative" in everything.

Who needs complexity when all of history reduces to such simple moral tales.

If you bothered to read the J Ed's post he said Deobandi Islam originated in South Asia, not Wahhabism.

 

[green.tea]

I guess ISIS is what happens when you focus too much on regime change and not enough on re-socialisation. A headless chicken.

 

[brogdale]

I guess ISIS is what happens when you focus too much on regime change and not enough on re-socialisation. A headless chicken.

Feeling charitable, I'd suggest you didn't quite mean that?

 

[Pickman's model]

I guess ISIS is what happens when you focus too much on regime change and not enough on re-socialisation. A headless chicken.

Guesses aren't good enough

 

[IC3D]

I think the roots of terrorism are in the Saudi funded mosques pooping up all over the world since the 80's spreading Salafi Islam. In conjunction with the failure of authoritarian socialism and secular movements in the middle East.

 

[green.tea]

Feeling charitable, I'd suggest you didn't quite mean that?

I did. It's no good just removing bad rulers when the center of the underlying ideological problem remains unchanged. With the Nazi's and Soviets we were used to fighting the center of ideological power lay with the rulers, but not so with aggressive interpretations of Islam.

 

[green.tea]

I think the roots of terrorism are in the Saudi funded mosques pooping up all over the world since the 80's spreading Salafi Islam. In conjunction with the failure of authoritarian socialism and secular movements in the middle East.

Meaning the source of the ideological problem is actually under the west's protection..

 

[brogdale]

I did. It's no good just removing bad rulers when the center of the underlying ideological problem remains unchanged. With the Nazi's and Soviets we were used to fighting the center of ideological power lay with the rulers, but not so with aggressive interpretations of Islam.

Ah yes, that "aggressive interpretation of Islam" known as Ba'athism.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think the roots of terrorism are in the Saudi funded mosques pooping up all over the world since the 80's spreading Salafi Islam. In conjunction with the failure of authoritarian socialism and secular movements in the middle East.

Yeh. Most people trace terrorism back rather further than 1980.

 

[IC3D]

Meaning the source of the ideological problem is actually under the west's protection..

They're not children, Islam is more powerful than that

 

[green.tea]

Ah yes, that "aggressive interpretation of Islam" known as Ba'athism.

I'm not talking about Iraq specifically. But about the way we tend to think about engaging a hostile state not being effective when the ideological center is elsewhere.

In Iraq's case getting rid of the Ba'ath party made room for the rise of the headless chicken I mentioned. Headless because the people in charge seem to genuinely believe that stuff, unlike people who change it's interpretations to meet practical desires.

Afghanistan provides a better illustration of my point because that invasion was an attempt at tackling the the ideological problem I'm talking about by attacking the country without being able to take control of the ideological center.