[downandout]

They are doing what they are doing because they have interpreted their primary religious text as explicitly instructing them to kill people that don't believe as they do. Killing another human being that poses no threat to you, regardless of what books you like to read or what instructions you believe they contain, is absolutely irrational - regardless of your "goal". Rational people have no way of understanding these actions, nor should they.

[jordigh]

No, that's again a refusal to understand why they are doing it. Happy religious people (say, devout Hindus during Diwali) don't go around killing others. There is a lot of "otherness" and segregation in Europe, poverty and war in the countries of origin, and many other factors that radicalise people. Saying that they're doing it because of a book (that they probably didn't even read) is just your own way to turn them into a justifiable target.

[sampo]

> There is a lot of "otherness" and segregation in Europe

There are lots of e.g. Indian, Chinese, South-East Asian, immigrants in Europe. And all over the world. If anything, they look less caucasian than people from Middle East / North Africa, so one would assume them to face even more racism. But they have not produced terrorists.

[solipsism]

Rational.. irrational.. I hope you can see that it's a pointless argument. The word "rational" is highly subjective so we shouldn't pretend there's some objective measure of rationality.

* Kill an innocent civilian * Have or perform an abortion * Eat meat * Fight in a war * Drop an atomic bomb on a city * Commit suicide

That's all shit that some people call rational and others call irrational. The truth is that "rational" is a word we choose because it sounds objective and authoritative, but it really means: "something that makes sense to me"

[tonyedgecombe]

It's important because to start to solve these problems you have to be able to see things from their point of view, you can't really do that if you think they are irrational.

[0mbre]

Well you can wonder why did these people act irrationaly? Could these behaviour have been detected? Could they have been helped out of this narrowed point of view of thinking that killing innocent is the right thing to do ? I don't think anyone today hasn't in mind those questions.

[tonyedgecombe]

But all the while you think they acted irrationally I don't think you will really be able to understand why they did it.

[spdustin]

Last I heard, they were doing this to avenge their countrymen. In fact, we don't really know all the whos and the whys, we just know the whats. And what happened was a horrible thing that needs to be investigated, pored over, and responded to in a measured, rational way that doesn't become a nationstate-enabled revenge plot.

[rdudek]

When you avenge your countrymen, you avenge by killing the people at fault... not innocent folks enjoying a concert.

[TeMPOraL]

Unless you want to do actual damage. In terror attacks, deaths are only collateral, the real damage is the overreaction of the attacked nation. It's an effective thing if you blame a country.

[alfapla]

> It's not intentional but I doubt ISIS sympathisers see the distinction.

I don't see the distinction either. If you drop a bomb and kill some people that you didn't intend to kill, you're still 100% responsible for those kills.

It is the saddest thing that we have found no better response to terrorism than limiting civil liberties and sending 18 year old boys with guns to foreign countries.

[Reef]

What if all you got is an Ak47 and they have ships, tanks, air fighters and drones in the sky?

Please think what would happen if the tables were turned - your country is invaded by a much bigger nation with a technological advantage. Would you organize a peaceful protest for your enemy to ignore?

[threeseed]

To be fair the US et al has killed many innocent civilians in the Middle East.

It's not intentional but I doubt ISIS sympathisers see the distinction.

[downandout]

This is ISIS, at least that's the best guess of most of the experts being quoted in the media (and most rational observers of world news).