SteeleRedux,
I know that France has been a target of Islamists for years.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2013/0114/Mali-Islamists-threaten-to-retaliate-at-the-heart-of-France-video

They had the Bastille Bastard and we almost had an ANZAC day massacre.
The threat's real enough.

You want to rescue people...
Don't you know the US started all this?

I'll support the US when they follow international law and can be trusted.
I don't support going into Syria without Assad's approval or a UN mandate.
I don't even think the Iraqi's want the US there anymore.
Even the rebels asked the US to stop bombing a few days back.

You do realise they killed more civilians the other day in those airstrikes than the Bastille Bastard did with his truck?
You want to kill ISIS? Fine with me.
Now go ask Assad's permission and join with the Russian plan.

Dear Armchair Critic,

I take it you would prefer Australia not be involved. That is a perfectly reasonable position to take. It isn't one I support particularly since we happily went to war in Iraq and it was the treatment of the Sunnis post invasion, particularly in the north, that has let ISIS explode. We made the mess and in my opinion should be helping to mitigate its fallout.

What gets my goat is the inane mantra that 'they are attacking us because they hate democracy and our way of life therefore we need to go and attack them'. What an absolute crock.

I would love to see out politicians tell us the truth about why we are involved. They have decided we should be there to support the US since in their estimation the alliance with the world's superpower is worth putting Australian civilian lives at a degree of risk. It is not an unreasonable argument and while I don't agree this should be our prime motive if that is what is takes to get help to so many at risk of ISIS then I will live with it.

What I hate is the bulldust rhetoric that they come out with because they feel the Australian public isn't capable of appreciating the truth. So they beat the drums of Islamophobia and most of us follow sheeplike , some even voting in someone like Hanson because of it.

Steeleredux what you say is certainly true but drop the superior tone when talking about Pauline Hanson. The fact is we are having people immigrate here who do not want to fit in, want our welfare and will cheat the system to get as much as they can. If these people's children adopted our way of life it would be acceptable but they do not. In fact their children become even worse.
By all means let them in, cheat our system and insult us but do not feign surprise when Pauline Hanson is fairly elected. Phobia, is an "irrational" fear but there is plenty to fear from a seventh century religion that hates our society.
Last time I looked it was one man one vote not you having more votes because of your self supposed superiority.

B Hell Steele can you really be that naive ?
I suppose you blame the Austrian's & Poles for the killing of moslems
at the gates of Vienna in the previous episode.
The French of course were attacked first by the moslems.
They actually got as far as Toures in Southern France.

Or perhaps you are one of those people who are very short sighted
and cannot even see as far back as 11 September 2001.
It is only now that people such as Pres Hollande and the Pope are
just coming to the conclusion that this is a war that has been
underway since 640 AD.
That is why Islamists consider that they are at war with Rome.
They equate the "West" generally as the Empire of Rome.
ISIS often refers to their war with Rome.

They can see the historical continuum, why can't you ?

SR and AC,

I understand that the delicate flowers on the left desperately cling to the belief that the only reason ISIS is nasty to France is because France is bombing them.

The fallacy of this theory is that neither Belgium, Germany nor even Turkey have attacked ISIS, and the planning for the attacks on France preceded France's involvement in the airstrikes. Appeasement or non involvement has never deterred bullies, and as with Al Qaeda a stable base is simply a platform to launch more well planned and funded attacks against civilians.

The reason ISIS attacks the west has more to do with publicity and recruitment than revenge. When ISIS massacres 300 Syrians, it makes barely a ripple, when it attacks civilians in the West, it is wall to wall headlines.

The destruction of ISIS in Iraq and Syria won't stop the venom against the west, but will deprive ISIS of the $100ms of revenue to kill thousands of Iraqis and Syrians, and reduce its ability to plan and fund attacks else where.

Of course, I believe that the root of all this trouble is Saudi Arabia's desire to spread its extremist version of Islam.

Steele, you seem to be a self-righteous risk-taker with the lives of others. Why not grow a spine and offer yourself now as a hostage swap for the next ISIS siege in Australia?

The fewer the sharks in the water the fewer people will be eaten when they go swimming. Why is such a simple mathematical concept so hard to swallow?

Maintaining Muslim immigration at current levels increases risk to the population. What we do about that is a separate question, but the fact remains.