egg

It's exactly that, and where do you start. Some would argue that the cause was Israel. Others will point to Iranian support of terror groups. Others to the US for it's part in Iran. There's so many intertwined issues. For me, fundamentally, we need to address a 2 state solution, quickly.

If you mean Islamist extremism, yes, but it's more nuanced than that. There's the behaviour of Israel since creation. Do you agree the behaviour of Israel post 1948, and 1967, has fuelled extremism?

You're being obtuse. Bin Laden said that the siege of Beirut was a reason for 9/11. That's a fact. It's relevance is that the Gaza episode is that with bells on. If that was avenged years later, the chances are that Gaza will. It was not avenged by an immediate neighbour. Or a protagonist. The notion that Israel has, or can, bomb it's way to safety is as misguided as many of it's apparently well targeted bombs. I highly doubt that extreme Islamist behaviour against Jewish people and the supporters of Israeli wars and oppression would be as much of an issue if the Israeli state did not conduct itself as it does, and that the Palestinians had a free and independent state.

That's an Iranian thing, post revolution, as I understand it. Is not the US support if Israel a factor in that?

I think the answer was obvious. Bin Laden said that the siege of Beirut was a reason. I don't dispute that, so I have no idea whether it would have happened if it were not for that.

Islam/Islam extremism is well established. That's not disputed. This is a thread about Israel. In that context, discussion of modern Islamist extremism (against non Muslims) must surely be in the context of Israel and it's supporters...

I'm intrigued to know what you know to make you doubt what Bin Laden said in 2004. Do you think that Islamists were grateful for the siege of Beirut, or perhaps a tad unhappy about the treatment of their brethren?

I haven't said Israeli behaviour was a reason for 9/11. Bin Laden did. That's a fact, not my opinion. Was that not Islamist extremism? Do you not think there's a prospect of history repeating itself? If it does, is it likely to come in the form of Islamist extremism? Do you think that the chances of Israel, it's people, and it's supporters, being the victims of Islamist extremism has increased or reduced as a consequence of the past 2 years? And I've said nothing about Jews, don't play that card.

They got all their targets mate. Hospitals, schools, infrastructure, homes, etc, and anyone in and around them. They were never getting rid of Hamas.

Nope. I've never hinted at that. I've just focused on reality. The point that started the exchange was that Israel are now safer. They're not. Short term they're safer from their immediate neighbours, but history tells us that treating it's neighbours as they do, whether that be Lebanon or Palestine or Yemen or Syria or Iraq etc, only invites trouble from further afield. Modern Islamic extremism is a post Israel phenomenon. Israel is here to stay, thus Islamic extremism is here to stay. Israel trying to bomb it away only increases it's risk. The West's ongoing support of Israel's puts the West increasingly in the firing line. If the Islamic extremists are financially and logistically choked, the extremism will be crude, as per Manchester recently. Israel and it's supporters are not safer.

Sure, there were a multitude of reasons, and the degree does not take away the fact that the siege of Beirut was avenged almost 20 years later by a people who were not directly impacted by it, and against a country who had no direct part in it. Various points flow from that, including. Israel can neuter it's direct neighbours all it likes, but states and groups further afield will still be there. Israel has developed more opposition, I think that's a given. The desire for revenge/punishment will be at least as strong as it was post Siege of Beirut. New terrorist or other rogue groups could crop up at any time. The siege of Beirut was stated as seeking to get rid of the PLO. It went. Up popped Hamas and Hezbollah, and vengeance was taken by Al Qaeda.

Now that's a crazy conspiracy theory that's got more support than it should have. Israel doing 9/11 - nuts.

That's why I think it sums the US up nicely. There's a way to tell people that the they reap what they sow. Then there's a divided, I don't give a shit about the other lot, US way. Sadly, that's a cold we're catching.

Slow Horses new season. Excellent so far.

Of course, but none of that alters the fact that Bin Laden said “As I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and destroy towers in America so that they taste some of what we tasted". Odd that people argue so hard against fact.

Err. Perhaps establish facts mate before spouting. Osama bin Laden explicitly said that the September 11th attacks were linked to the 1982 Siege of Beirut. He made this statement in a video released in 2004, just before the U.S. presidential election, and offered it as a reason for the attacks. Islamists exist beyond Afghanistan.

Retribution for the siege of Beirut was not taken by an immediate Israeli neighbour, and not against them. Sure, Iran have shown themselves as weak, comparatively, but Israel cannot attack every nation and group who oppose their behaviour and objectives. 2nd point. They've always had that ability - it's entirely their choice how close they permit Kibbutz near the border. A buffer zone does not need to be within Gaza.

That misses the point. Al Qaeda weren't a thing during the siege of Beirut. 19 years later they were, and we got 9/11 as a consequence. Your focus is narrow. 20 hostages. 7/10. Hamas. Etc. There's a much wider picture. It's obvious that revenge for this against Israel and it's supporters will be sought by Islamists. Israel's constant attempts to reduce that threat (e.g. today - Lebanon), and it's ongoing Zionism, only increases the appetite.

The alternative to a "police force" or similar is nothing. That gives a real risk of civil unrest or anarchy. Someone has to police the people. Hamas still rule Gaza, so Hamas operatives will do the policing - that should be obvious. Doubtless you'll explain the alternative...and I don't me in due course when (hopefully) new governance and a civil structure is in place. I mean today and the immediate future.

Or it addresses fears.

Degrading Hamas makes Israel in the immediate future, but breeding another generation of Palestinians (and piers in the Arab world) wanting to resist does not make them safer long term. Additionally, Bin Laden's explanation for 9/11 tells us that organised Jihadi/islamic terrorist groups will seek vengeance at some point. They waited 19 years to do that.

That's a more polished version of what I meant!

It's accurate to say that he hadn't done anything to suggest he'd do it at championship level. That's not to say he may have cut it given a chance. Regardless, the lad needed regular men's football. He probably wouldn't have got that here.

No. He'd done nothing to suggest he'd do it at championship level, and he needed to move on to play regularly. Glad the move is working out for him.

Very odd. They don't need to be vegan.