Did you pick up on this bit from Armchair Critic ?

All these attacks are allowed to happen because they promote a narrative - - etc

This seems on a par with the "It has nothing to do with Islam" narrative.

Brussels and Paris have now had a sample of what Israel has put up with daily for decades. So ironic that it was so close to the Israel hating UN. They won't learn from it because regressives are totally stuck in their narrative. Very sad.

I agree Runner, what those that are making excuses, blame shifting,
making all sorts of excuses just simply do not understand is

ALL THAT DOES NOT MATTER A DAMN !

It is a war and it is survival for one place at a time.
We have to forget all the rights and wrongs some may think have been
done to the Middle East, all that is irrelevant.
The rules have changed and it is now boots and all.

Our problem is there is no one in government we can expect to take off
their trendy rose coloured glasses.

If we have an incident like Belgium or Paris who would you want to be Prime Minister ?

Malcolm Turnbull or Tony Abbott ?

.Armchair Critic
All these attacks are allowed to happen because they promote a narrative that puts an agenda on the table for a military response in Syria. Is all bs, and you people eat it up and can't get enough..

And what does the West gain by an attack on Syria.
Putin is the one who can finish off the Syrian conflict and the Isis one because he
Is not held back by only bombing military targets like the West.

See the gains the Assad government has made in taking back territory
Since Putin entered the war.

Also Isis is losing previously taken territory as well.

As the chief Australian defence Analyst said on Q&A one night,
We could defeat Isis in a week but we can't bomb civilians.
Putin does bomb Isis held cities which flushes them out of their
Hiding places.

Assad is the one America should be on side with.
Because it was the so called moderate Muslims who stormed Damascus in large
Numbers.
As we've seen in Europe you can't hold large numbers back with cotton wool methods.n
Assad retaliated with force to protect Damascus Aleppo and the people who live there.

Bazz,
<We have to forget all the rights and wrongs some may think have been
done to the Middle East, all that is irrelevant.>

I agree?

The trouble is the Australian media spent years, parroting what The Arabs
told them
But the Arabs never mentioned the very large part they played in starting these
Conflicts. They never mention the 6day war when 4 Arab states raced over and
Attacked Israel, They then demanded the land that Israel took as a buffer zone
Back, calling it the occupied territories, when Israel beat them in six days.
Because every Israelie, even the women do national military training. Something
They learnt was prudent after what happened in Germany.

The talk of the occupied territories is a one sided propaganda version put out by the Arabs,never mentioning their attack on Israel. The media never mentions it either, they'd have to do some historical reading and they don't bother, even though it only happened
about 60years ago. So they only mention the occupied territories too, thus putting Israel in the spotlight as the evil occupier.

Also, the Ottoman Empire,, again the Muslims, just about ethnically cleansed all the Large groups of European Christians out of the Middle East in the middle 1800s.
Over Time the Europeans fought back and re-established some non Muslim areas in the Middle East.
So the Muslims have along history of ethnic cleansing and agression in the Middle East.
They also secretly plotted with Hitler.

The Western media never prints or talks about the other side of the story because they never go and look up the history, they just take the easy way and believe what Muslims tell them about the histor
Of the Middle East. Of course the Muslim version never puts in the bits about their wrong doings.

Dear Bazz, runner, Kactus, Luciferase

I offer you an opportunity to demonstrate your commitment to Australian values.

You all maintain that the violence we have been seeing is the outgrowth of Islamic teachings and continuation of a tradition that can be traced back to the Prophet.

Against this argument I offer you the words of Bernard Lewis. He has been one of the most eminent scholars of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies. And far from being an apologist for Islam, he was the one who coined the phrase “Clash of Civilisations” (used by Huntington). He aligned himself with the pro-Israel lobby in the US and later the Neocons in advocating for the invasion of Iraq to topple Suddam Hussein. when Bush and Chaney were dismissing advice of their Arab experts, they we consulting with Lewis.

Yet what Lewis has to say about Islam completely undermines the cases being prosecuted by you guys. Read on,

“Muslim fighters are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged unless they attack first; not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners; give fair warnings of the opening of hostilities or their resumption after a truce; and to honor agreements. In the medieval juristic literature, there are interesting discussions about the lawfulness of missiles, such as mangonels and catapults, and of chemical warfare, in form of poison-tipped arrows and poisoning enemy water supplies. Some jurisits permit, some restrict, and some disapprove of the use of these weapons.

At NO TIME did the classical jurists offer any approval or legitimacy to what we nowadays call terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism as it is practiced nowadays.” Source: Bernard Lewis “Islam: the religion and the people” p. 151

The test now is for you guys (Bazz, runner, Kactus, and Luciferase) to either concede to undisputed authority or to somehow launch a challenge to this authority. But don't do a runner (pun intended). A runner would not only be cowardly, but represent a betrayal of the values you claim to be defending... Australia would be best served if you just kept running.