Are we in danger of 'normalising' terrorism?

[Cyclone]

The comparison to how we react is entirely appropriate.

Pete is claiming that it's become normalised and we react less than we previously did.

So how is it he thinks we reacted in the past?

[unbeliever]

The comparison to how we react is entirely appropriate.

Pete is claiming that it's become normalised and we react less than we previously did.

So how is it he thinks we reacted in the past?

 

We were reacting to a different level of threat. Why should our reaction be expected to be similar?

Normalising and tolerating the threat from the provisional IRA would have been far more reasonable given the level of that threat, than it would be to do the same for Daesh and their ilk.

[Cyclone]

Well Pete is claiming that the reaction is lesser now.

 

Which makes little sense if the threat is higher as you are claiming. (I don't think it is, the number of terrorist incidents has decreased).

 

If it's impossible to compare, then what is Pete comparing to when he claims that we are normalising terrorism?

 

You can't have it both ways, either there is something to compare, and Pete can then explain how our reaction has changed. Or there is nothing to compare and the entire thread makes no sense.

[unbeliever]

Well Pete is claiming that the reaction is lesser now.

 

Which makes little sense if the threat is higher as you are claiming. (I don't think it is, the number of terrorist incidents has decreased).

 

If it's impossible to compare, then what is Pete comparing to when he claims that we are normalising terrorism?

 

You can't have it both ways, either there is something to compare, and Pete can then explain how our reaction has changed. Or there is nothing to compare and the entire thread makes no sense.

 

If we reacted more strongly to a far lesser threat in the past than we have to the current threat then I would have thought the point was rather a good one.

I'm not sure I agree with Pete's point anyway. I just don't like it when it appears to me that the threat from Daesh and the like is played down by inappropriate comparisons and misleading statistics.

[Mister M]

I can't claim to be any authority on the subject but I don't think that we are in danger of normalising terrorism. If anything the actions of Daesh seem more incomprehensible and alien than that of the IRA for example.

Perhaps that's because the reason for Daesh seem so remote and incomprehensible. At least that's how it appears to me.

[El Cid]

You've got the last line right

 

I find myself saying, far too often "It wasn't like that years ago".

 

Terror attacks are not on the increase, we have always had terrorism, there is less terrorism now, compared to decades ago.

Perhaps this subject is like crime, many think its much worse than year ago, but crime is lower now.

 

The Baader-Meinhof Gang - which is held responsible for 296 bomb attacks, arson and other attacks between 1973 and 1995. There are/were many other terrorist groups.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_European_Union#Trend

[Mister M]

We could start by applying the law to religion and ban the publication and distribution of any material that promotes hate.

 

They will be forced to rewrite their respective books with the old hate filled books being resigned to history unavailable to all, in a couple of generations the only religious text that would be available will be material that promotes peace, tolerance, equality and fairness.

 

I think the exponents of Daesh have deliberately misinterpreted the Quran, according to which, suicide is considered a mortal sin. Yet that is the very method by which the terrorists choose to kill others, and themselves, with explosives strapped to them in crowded places.

[Cyclone]

If we reacted more strongly to a far lesser threat in the past than we have to the current threat then I would have thought the point was rather a good one.

Surely that would be the exact opposite of what Pete claimed?

[sutty27]

I think the exponents of Daesh have deliberately misinterpreted the Quran, according to which, suicide is considered a mortal sin. Yet that is the very method by which the terrorists choose to kill others, and themselves, with explosives strapped to them in crowded places.

 

I think they are interpreting it accurately and based on the history of Muhammad they are just doing as he did. They don't consider their deaths to be suicide, just like the Japanese Kamikaze pilots didn't consider their actions to be suicide.

 

"And say not of those who are killed in the Way of Allah, “They are dead.” Nay, they are living, but you perceive (it) not."

 

"Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

 

According to the Koran if they die in the way of Allah they are not dead, hence they didn't kill themselves so haven't actually committed suicide.

Edited March 26, 2016 by sutty27

[Nagel]

I read a very interesting article earlier on De Speld (Dutch site) apparently a lady called Samantha has survived three!!! terrorism attacks by being in a different place from where they occurred.

 

Absolutely incredible story, she is so brave.

 

She's not brave, she just unlucky.