Actually I don’t, I’m of an age where terrorism will always be synonymous first and foremost with the IRA. In my early adult years I routinely looked under my car whenever I’d parked it in central London, kept an eye out for suspicious looking parcels, was always waiting for the next bomb alert and the next newspaper headline. Brown faces and turbans didn’t come into it. I know things have changed but that’s what’s imprinted on my subconscious.
So you don’t think it would have saved a lot of lives if the German youth had been deradicalised at some point in the 1920s/30s/40s?
Irish Republicanism hasn’t gone away, it still exists but we just don’t hear too much about it anymore.
Extremist attacks from all sides will continue and there is very little governments or us as individuals can do to stop them, the best that we can hope for is that the frequency of the attacks is kept to minimum.
Irish Republicanism is by no means extremism, it is a just, legitimate and noble aspiration by the Irish, and will continue up to and after the whole of the island of Ireland is united as a Republican State.
That will happen, and the premiership of Boris Johnson will accelerate it, I have no doubts about that.
I agree very much with this opinion, Tim. The question is, how? Johnson’s solution is IMO a sordid taint on the memory of Jack Merritt who died at London Bridge, and a gratuitous insult to the grieving father’s testimony to his son’s mission.
@anon22869222: 15 actually, old enough to tell right from wrong
IMO that’s a rather simplistic view of adolescent mentality. At 15 young people are actively exploring the notions of right and wrong transmitted to them by their parents. Aren’t adolescents always arguing with Mum and Dad about their ideas of right and wrong, challenging their parents’ and teachers views on justice, and engaging in ‘risky’ behaviour to test out their developing ideas and values? Normal adolescent behaviour as they learn and mature.
For goodness sake, Mary, what’s your experience of bringing up teenage kids, or teaching them? If you are a member of the Strict Brethren, related to the Rees-Moggs, or 150 years old, I apologise
Well from my experience, I think people around the age of 15 /16 do know what is considered right and wrong and ,possibly more to the point , what is acceptable. they maybe testing what the boundaries are and what they can get away with but the basics are there. You put emphasis on the parents,but they will also have spent a long time in the education system,possibly in organisations etc that will reinforce this knowledge. We are possibly getting back to nature or nurture. I have known children from absolutely fantastic backgrounds who have been basically evil and from backgrounds that have been decidedly dodgy that have made fine upstanding members of society
If you’re old enough to start developing ideas and values you should be old enough to understand the concept of personal responsiblity and consequences. Risking consequences for yourself is one thing - you know if you drink too much you will probably get a hangover but you do it anyway; you have unprotected sex and you know you might get pregnant but you take a chance. You nick a mars bar and you might get into trouble with the police. It’s your body and your future you are gambling with. But it’s a bit different when the consequences affect other people and other people’s property. Otherwise we would be saying that it’s OK for ados to engage in vandalism and arson and burglary and violence and terrorism because they are just challenging received notions, bless them. So with respect Peter, I think saying that anything goes as "normal adolescent behaviour’ is also rather simplistic, and dangerous. By the age of 15 you should have understood that there are red lines that you don’t cross.
Where were you during the troubles, i was strolling down the Falls, Crumlin and Shankill roads at the age of 18 during those times. So I beg to differ to your statement of extremism.
In general, yes - I would expect most 15-year olds to know basic right from wrong, but Peter has a very valid point - their general sense of self, moral standpoint, ability to balance the needs of the individual and society, view of events in a wider context etc are still very much in development at that point and - more importantly - can easily be manipulated.
We have to remember, whatever our view of her current situation or current likelihood of rehabilitation that she was a victim of grooming and radicalisation to a degree that very few 15 year old kids would be able to resist.
I’m sure you both knew what I was talking about…it’s a stereotype that you can both pick to pieces as much as you like ; but, unfortunately, most people think that terrorists come from the middle east, have a darker complexion than Europeans, & wear “dresses”…whereas, the Irish were the victims of being fucked over by the English (see Anna’a post above.)
According to various political figures, we don’t negotiate with terrorists" despite Thatcher talking to the IRA ; the Johnson fiasco meeting M. Macguinness ; & even Charlie boy meeting J. Adams…& now a Tory mp, that was reputedly an IRA member.
So explain to me the different types of terrorist that exist ; & how a brown terrorist differs from a white one.
