One and the same, and still a crap one.

Optimistic as ever

Agreed,much about Malaya can be legitimately argued over,but essentially the British (while I agree being quite brutal at various times in their counter insurgency tactics) successfully "won over" many hearts and minds in the Chinese community and kept them attuned to a pro-Western tack rather than the Malayan Communist Party/Malayan National Liberation Army.

That wasn't so much about ethnic segregation, communities were pretty separate in reality pre "the Emergency",more about stopping support for the MCP/MNLA within its main target "hinterland" the Chinese community.

I do think the US failed to learn some of the lessons from Malaya re "hearts and minds" not least supporting/bolstering pro western politicians who were not innately corrupt/divise and so had some change of garnering genuine local support.

Edited by legaleagle (20 Jul 2016 2.08pm)

Your suggestion was images of the prophet. There are , as you say, existing laws that cover deliberate incitement to violence and they are more than enough.

Henry VIII might have had selfish intensions and short sighted but as it turned out, the upheaval in the past was worth it to rid ourselves of the Pope. Sometimes achieving the right outcome requires some negatives along the way.

I'm not sure I see Norther Ireland history quite the same way either. We stood up to the IRA, especially during the Thatcher era and despite a heavy price paid, we arrived at a peace. One can speculate as to what would have happened if we had taken softer approach.

Yeah, but sometimes its good to get some specific good will in a subculture or group and appeal to them directly. I wouldn't say that all of the issues of the Islamic community could be incorporated into UK law, but there was some interesting stuff on Sharia law I read recently, which if you're talking about the more moderate, every day Muslim, wouldn't even require changes to British Law to accept.

And in the long term, our community will always consist of groups outside the 'will of the majority', and part of the responsibility of a democracy is to represent not just those that win you votes, but everyone. Even the stuff you don't like (I'm probably about as anti-religious as you can get, but I do get that most religious people in the UK are generally normal law abiding folk, and need to be represented as well). Granted, give me an ideal world, and there would be no room for religion...

Really though you can thank Elizabeth the I and Francis Walsingham especially for that. But of course the purge of Catholics power in the UK, was achieved in a manner not dissimilar to that of IS.

Although Henry the VIIIth was really just resolving a long dispute, common in the monarchy of England between the Divine Right of Kings and Papal authority. England was always a 'troublesome' and often 'less than friendly' authority to the Church.

Thatcher was holding talks with the Provisional IRA throughout the 80s, or at least by proxy - The British Secret Service also functioned in Ireland to preserve Sinn Feins position as well as acting on at least two occasions to prevent the assassination of Gerry Adams by loyalists, and to keep him in position as the lead republican voice in the Provisional IRA - He and the UK saw the future of Republicanism as ultimately unachievable by violence - and the UK could deal and compromise on a basis of him bringing about the peace process

Competition to the Provisionals, such an INLA, were dealt with, isolated and effectively destroyed with far more efficiency, than was shown to the Provos.

Also increasing peace meant prosperity, and improvement in the conditions of the Catholic community, and by encouraging and supporting moderate protestant voices like Trimble, the hardline on both the republican and loyalist sides were increasingly being over taken by 'more reasonable representatives' who you could make 'a deal with'.

Adams manipulation of the IRA increasingly saw more 'acceptable' people in the organisation, and increasingly less violent actions, especially on the UK mainland.

In the end, Sinn Fein ended up in the UK parliament, and with a considerable voice in the NI assembly, and the troubles more or less, have been put to bed.

Increased prosperity in NI was directed towards the Catholic communities. Catholics increased in representation in the RUC, local government and income and the appeal of 'A war with the British' diminished as life opportunities for Catholics increased (and the protestant moderates were also key in assuring this happened).

Its distasteful, and arguably morally wrong, but the end result was effective. The end result though does seem to have been successful. The appeal of groups like the Real IRA etc are very limited, and more localised to rural areas and more geared around organised crime positioning, than political ambitions.

A lot of what happened, like the freedom of prisoners, I didn't like, but it also was necessary to establish a lasting peace, and compromise is inevitable - But the really important thing, was not winning over the IRA, UVF but managing to isolate their appeal from the Protestant and Catholic communities.

Whilst we were still fighting the Provisional IRA and UVF, the British Government in the 80s and 90s, were working to change the communities, and engage the people - You can't beat an idea, but you can make that idea less and less appealing, by offering alternatives and eliminating the frustration and alienation that leads to people seeing violence as the only response.

Even if it means a c**t like Gerry Adams, better him than some c**t you can't make a deal with.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Dude?!

Hrolf,I am worried that corrosive external forces may be permeating your cerebal hygiene!

Minority and majorities must compromise, but the majority hold a great sway of influence over minorities. To find a common ground, between the averages in society, everyone has to compromise.

We extend many religious exemptions to assorted religions, whilst remaining primarily secular, in doing so we compromise with minority groups as a process that includes those groups into society.

The important issue in Ireland wasn't compromising with the IRA, but dealing with the social issues and complaints of the Catholic community and creating the possibility of a political solution.

As I've said countless times, its not about compromise with IS, Al-Qaeda et al. That's never an option, because their issues and basis are largely undeliverable for us (primarily the creation of an Islamic state for the first, and the second a series of issues revolving around Saudia Arabia and Middle Eastern geo-politics we have no real influence over.

The issue, is about greater integration of the Muslim community into the wider mainstream, creating a public political means of raising and addressing issues,rather than increasing isolation and demonization, whilst simultaneously targeting IS, and those who recruit for them, finance them and provide real support to such groups.

At present there aren't really any political parties that address issues from the Muslim community in our democratic process, arguably Respect (the f**king farce) were the only outlet. And that's how significant a political outlet is, that George F**king Galloway was elected.

You often talk about the success of UKIP, but remember that Galloway won a seat in parliament, for Respect, on the basis of support from 4.4% of the population - By addressing issues specifically from the Muslim community (and against a popular Labour opposition).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]