The Gooner Forum

Having just watched a real life (St. Arsene does tactics) miracle I'm starting to believe.

I'm with you Joe, church of the arsenal is the one true faith

I think an exorcism is needed

I was beginning to think that the new Pope wasn't quite as much of an arsehole as his predecessors when he today criticised the Phillipine govt for their attempts to control the birth rate, while addressing a crowd of 6 MIILION in one place!

Chippy, I can see the point you were trying to make but you got it hugely wrong, mate. You simply cannot compare what the IRA vermin did in the 1970's to what Muslim extremist vermin are doing now.

As much as I abhor the IRA, they had a clear set of goals they tried to achieve by their terror campaign. They wanted a united Ireland with the British out of the north. They didn't want to change Britain/England or the culture of Britain/England. The IRA leadership knew as early as 1975 that they were fighting a war they could not win in the classic sense. Some historians are now postulating that the IRA leadership had settled on the concept of a power sharing agreement in NI (with NI remaining part of the UK) even in the early 1980's. Their campaign was designed to get British public opinion to force the British government to the negotiating table. And tbh, many would say that campaign worked to some extent.

These Islamic extremists don't want anything from us, they are not trying to force us to the negotiating table. But they are trying to change western (and by association British/French) culture. Because their terror is based on a "non-physical, moralistic concept" like religion, rather than a physical goal like "freedom or independence or unity" it is all the more horrific to the general public. The individual Islamic terrorist wants to be martyred whilst killing Westerners/Jews/Christians/Infidels etc. That is all he wants. You simply cannot negotiate with that.

We do need to exterminate these extremists, because there is no negotiating with them. But we must also be extremely careful not to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Just as most British people were thankfully intelligent enough not to tar all Irish people with the same brush as the IRA back in the 1970's/80's.

DB10GOONER wrote:
We do need to exterminate these extremists, because there is no negotiating with them. But we must also be extremely careful not to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Just as most British people were thankfully intelligent enough not to tar all Irish people with the same brush as the IRA back in the 1970's/80's.

I'm not saying anything.

DB I'm sorry to say you missed the point of my post. I was not equating the IRA with current Islamist terrorists. I was trying to highlight how extreme Augie's post was. Basically he was pretty much saying all muslims are fair game. If the British had taken that view of the Irish in the 70s (and some wanted to) then I think we would all be in a much worse situation today. Me especially.

Chippy wrote:DB I'm sorry to say you missed the point of my post. I was not equating the IRA with current Islamist terrorists. I was trying to highlight how extreme Augie's post was. Basically he was pretty much saying all muslims are fair game. If the British had taken that view of the Irish in the 70s (and some wanted to) then I think we would all be in a much worse situation today. Me especially.

Oh I got your point, but my point is that the two conflicts/issues (and public/government perception of them) are so vastly different that the comparison isn't valid. In augie's last post he lists the reasons why most intelligent British people didn't turn on the Irish en-masse. Also, I don't think augie's first post was that extreme tbh. I think he clearly said if a Muslim is non-violent and respectful of local culture/society then they shouldn't be judged in the same fashion as the jihadist/terrorist.

arseofacrow wrote:

DB10GOONER wrote:
We do need to exterminate these extremists, because there is no negotiating with them. But we must also be extremely careful not to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Just as most British people were thankfully intelligent enough not to tar all Irish people with the same brush as the IRA back in the 1970's/80's.

I'm not saying anything.

Careful now, tiger...

DB10GOONER wrote:

Chippy wrote:DB I'm sorry to say you missed the point of my post. I was not equating the IRA with current Islamist terrorists. I was trying to highlight how extreme Augie's post was. Basically he was pretty much saying all muslims are fair game. If the British had taken that view of the Irish in the 70s (and some wanted to) then I think we would all be in a much worse situation today. Me especially.

Oh I got your point, but my point is that the two conflicts/issues (and public/government perception of them) are so vastly different that the comparison isn't valid. In augie's last post he lists the reasons why most intelligent British people didn't turn on the Irish en-masse. Also, I don't think augie's first post was that extreme tbh. I think he clearly said if a Muslim is non-violent and respectful of local culture/society then they shouldn't be judged in the same fashion as the jihadist/terrorist.

tbf, he also advocated bombing innocent Muslims

GranadaJoe wrote:

DB10GOONER wrote:

Chippy wrote:DB I'm sorry to say you missed the point of my post. I was not equating the IRA with current Islamist terrorists. I was trying to highlight how extreme Augie's post was. Basically he was pretty much saying all muslims are fair game. If the British had taken that view of the Irish in the 70s (and some wanted to) then I think we would all be in a much worse situation today. Me especially.

Oh I got your point, but my point is that the two conflicts/issues (and public/government perception of them) are so vastly different that the comparison isn't valid. In augie's last post he lists the reasons why most intelligent British people didn't turn on the Irish en-masse. Also, I don't think augie's first post was that extreme tbh. I think he clearly said if a Muslim is non-violent and respectful of local culture/society then they shouldn't be judged in the same fashion as the jihadist/terrorist.

tbf, he also advocated bombing innocent Muslims

Yes he did!

One of the Ten Commandments is Thou shalt not take the Lord's Name in Vain.. I as a child assumed that meant not using Jesus or God in a swearing context, but was recently informed by someone who is more in tune with it than I that it means that The Lord or God's name cannot be used in the context of violence , in other words do not kill or maim in the name of God.

I suggest not listening to anybody who says they are 'in tune' with what god means!

Bradywasking wrote:One of the Ten Commandments is Thou shalt not take the Lord's Name in Vain.. I as a child assumed that meant not using Jesus or God in a swearing context, but was recently informed by someone who is more in tune with it than I that it means that The Lord or God's name cannot be used in the context of violence , in other words do not kill or maim in the name of God.

Unless the bloke is an expert in ancient hebrew and knows what was going through the head of a man writing something down about 1000 years after it allegedly happened then I would suggest he hasn't got a scooby.

Chippy wrote:

Bradywasking wrote:One of the Ten Commandments is Thou shalt not take the Lord's Name in Vain.. I as a child assumed that meant not using Jesus or God in a swearing context, but was recently informed by someone who is more in tune with it than I that it means that The Lord or God's name cannot be used in the context of violence , in other words do not kill or maim in the name of God.

Unless the bloke is an expert in ancient hebrew and knows what was going through the head of a man writing something down about 1000 years after it allegedly happened then I would suggest he hasn't got a scooby.

Never suggested he was an expert, just more in tune than me.