This will be our reply to violence...

Our security services are also helped by having no common borders - weapons etc harder to bring in. Apparently we are "embedded" with the French security so they should know what we know. They also have the same powers as our lot.

Iran must not get nuclear capability otherwise God help us.

We declare war on IS. Give Syria back to Assad. And then try to negotiate to get rid of him.

We would have to go along with the Russians when they say, "a rebel is a rebel".

The west could get rid of huge numbers of them with the aid of drones, air strikes, and technology.

And yes, ab. It's an us or them situation.

So when the drones, air strikes and technology accidently kill innocent men, women and children do we just write them off as collateral damage.

We quite rightly condemn the terrorists for killing indiscriminately then plan to do exactly the same thing to other innocent people.

The west always does its utmost to avoid collateral damage. It is never done deliberately. That is the difference.

There is no any easy answer to this.

The west had no problem attacking the MSF hospital

There is no way to avoid collateral damage in war VQ ...the alternatives are even worse, doing nothingnothing and allowing evil men and women to flourish.

ISIS has recently beheaded a group which included women and children. Imagine the kind of people who would behead a child?

So killing innocents is wrong if the terrorists do it deliberately but OK if we do it by accident.

Deliberately or accidently they're still dead.

Haven't we learned by now that violence only begets more violence.

So what's the alternative, vampirequeen?

So we don't do anything then?

I'd be only too happy to take the same stance as Anniebach and vq but could they please come up with an alternative to doing nothing?

During the WW2 when we knew we would be under attack from the air we evacuated our children to (hopefully) safer areas. Their welfare was a huge concern.

ISIS are too busy killing their own kind to be worried about what happens to the children so why is the guilt trip always ours?

As for violence begetting more violence....What does sticking your head in the sand beget?

I said in a previous post that I don't have an answer. I'm not in the security services business. I just don't see the point of repeating actions that have been tried many times and have never been successful.

They have to come up with something new.

It's a lose lose situation; if we retaliate we're playing into their hands and if we do nothing they will carry on killing innocent people. But it still all goes back to us meddling in the politics of countries; not using that as an excuse but wondering how there is any way forward from it all . War and conflict leads to more war and conflict. Pacifism relies on there being good in the world but there is an evil amongst us that we can't seem to contain.

We contained it before, we can do it again, if we all act together.

By what means, roses?

A knee jerk reaction is what they want. They want to provoke the west and then they will get their holy war with the Muslim countries who are at present against Isis banding together agaist the West. Before you know it WW3.

Exactly Cherrytree ,

Cherrytree, Are you suggesting we do nothing and then they'll stop provoking us?

Do you seriously think that will happen?

Who are going to retaliate against?
Its a bit like hanging everyone in the vain hope that in amongst them is the guilty one. They will use the innocent as human shields whilst they are all under ground in caves. At the moment we have a few hundred killed in the west which is a few hundred too many. But do we want it to escalate to thousands if the likes of Iran gets involved?

Iran is involved. Villages in Iran have been occupied by ISIS and people there, including children I repeat, beheaded. But let's ignore this shall we because we're OK and we don't want to provoke these people.

Then iran must sort their country out Much better The Arab world sort it out. They won't look on it as the West meddling. They are more than capable. We are not the police of the World. The Alrewas arboretum has a large curved marble wall with a large empty space awaiting the names of our service men and women killed in action.

(I just posted this reply on another thread, so apologies if you read it there.)

Ordinary Muslims have been the biggest victims of IS, so I support the suggestion that the forces which stop IS must be made up of forces from Arab countries. That means both Sunni and Shia Muslims fighting for the common cause. The end result might be a Middle East that looks different to the one we have now, but that will be the price of defeating IS.

This can be backed by UN forces, but different countries with vested interests in the area need to stop leading the fighting.

The only means to do this is by a lot of countries all banding together, the West working alongside Russia and all Muslims who want to defeat ISIS.
It has to be done.