Manchester Terrorist Attack

[Reboot]

Reading trouble?

Or is speculating on motivation & scenario to prompt such an act in such a place targeting such a specific demographic not allowed?

" I’d guess that this was likely an English born kid of Islamic faith that felt continually rejected by girls and was mentally unstable"
A very long bow pulled there.
That was all a bit Dr Phil for me.

[Windy_Dill]

If I had to guess I’d say he had small hands and smelled of cabbage.

[Deckham]

If I had to guess I’d say he had small hands and smelled of cabbage.

Ok.
I chortled.

[Riolio]

I reckon the attacker came from a complicated background to which there are no easy answers.

[cul_de_sac]

Don’t be so naive

[SpicedRum]

Maybe he just didnt like Ariana Grande… seems plausible? Occams razor and all…

[Dodga]

I’ll get flamed for this, but part of any solution must include no longer bombing the Middle East.

The people who executed this attack are filth. But so are those who execute attacks all over the Middle East every damn day.

With the exception of ISIS held territory I assume? Their leadership needs to be chased down every last rat hole that they flee into until they are wiped from the face

[dingus]

I’ll get flamed for this, but part of any solution must include no longer bombing the Middle East.

The people who executed this attack are filth. But so are those who execute attacks all over the Middle East every damn day.

With the exception of ISIS held territory I assume? Their leadership needs to be chased down every last rat hole that they flee into until they are wiped from the face

Does ISIS held territory have children, schools, hospitals?

Then no. Not with the exception of ISIS held territory.

[Deckham]

What, are you saying that children and innocent adults should not, actually, be bombed and killed???
You farking monster.

[andrewb]

I’ll get flamed for this, but part of any solution must include no longer bombing the Middle East.

The people who executed this attack are filth. But so are those who execute attacks all over the Middle East every damn day.

With the exception of ISIS held territory I assume? Their leadership needs to be chased down every last rat hole that they flee into until they are wiped from the face

I’m struggling to name a single US intervention since WW2 that has had a positive outcome. The less the better as far as I’m concerned. I would have been happy for all the extremists to go and live in their caliphate, providing they surrendered their passports and never returned

[Dodga]

Pretty sure they wont have schools but fair enough.

I agree that you dont want a single civillian casualty. Bombing should be targetted on their military holds only. I thought you meant letting them off the hook completely for a minute.

[SMJ]

I didn’t! I don’t know where it went or why it was deleted.

[saladin]

I agree that the “West” needs to stop bombing/destabilising countries.

But at a practical level and viewing the actual situation, its also a two edged sword. Are we comfortable knowing that ISIS are wreaking savagery on conquered areas with no likelihood of local forces overthrowing them?

Its a tough one and very often the “West” get morally hammered if they intervene or dont intervene.

If the viewpoint is stay out and let them deal with it themselves then thats fine but you have to accept some pretty terrible outcomes for innocent people.

I dont know which is the less objectionable pathway.

[saladin]

One arrest made in connection to Manchester bombing.

[Deckham]

Its a tough one and very often the “West” get morally hammered if they intervene or dont intervene.

It’s an extremely complex one, true, and that’s why the ‘solution’ would also be at least equally as complex. And take generations to achieve. Not political terms lengths.

[andrewb]

I agree that the “West” needs to stop bombing/destabilising countries.

But its also a two edged sword. Are we comfortable knowing that ISIS are wreaking savagery on conquered areas with no likelihood of local forces overthrowing them?

Its a tough one and very often the “West” get morally hammered if they intervene or dont intervene.

If the viewpoint is stay out and let them deal with it themselves then thats fine but you have to accept some pretty terrible outcomes for innocent people.

I dont know which is the less objectionable pathway.

I think I’d be more comfortable if it wasn’t so obviously motivated by commercial interests and religious crap about the holy lands. The US hasn’t been nearly as active against regimes that murdered people but didn’t control critical energy assets.

As silly as it sounds the motivation of any intervention is absolutely critical- without a pure motivation the necessary collateral damage to overthrow a regime will feed unrest. That’s why the UN, despite its painfully slow response times, has so much more long term success.

If the caliphate were established and left to its own devices then it would have eaten itself eventually at a great cost to extremism. It was disorganised and run by a pack of peanuts.

[handypoint]

So sad but also so tired of this. The political motivation behind this stuff will.never ever get up.

I can’t stand the inevitable presumed/assumed/actual backlash against Muslims too. I’m just sick of hearing about them as a group s well.(I just don’t identify, same with other religions).

I just enjoy the public holidays and family and friends rituals we get here as a result. Eg
(easters camping, Chrissy is catching up with In-laws followed by the cricket).

We live in a lucky country where most people wake up to the fact that once you have peace you don’t need to be a god botherer after a few generations.(statistically).

Anyway back to more needless violence. ■■■■ news, poor kids.

[dingus]

Pretty sure they wont have schools but fair enough.

I agree that you dont want a single civillian casualty. Bombing should be targetted on their military holds only. I thought you meant letting them off the hook completely for a minute.

No, definitely not. Troops on the ground if anything rather than indiscriminate bombing. If they resist, kill them and only them. If they don’t, arrest them.

Simplistic I know and as Sal has said, no easy options. But killing children is the worst one, be it in Manchester or Kabul.

[Saucy]

I can’t wait to hear how that scumbag Waleed aly defends his savage religion this time.

[BLOODSTAINED_DEVILS]

wut?