Nairobi terrorist attack

[amateur51]

I'm not sure whether you read the whole article? It's slightly bizarre for an academic work in being written in very poor English - strange, in that foreign language papers are vetted by editors, I would have thought.

It divides into two parts:

1. The (military) structure of the movement. Interesting enough in itself, but not of primary relevance here. Descriptive.

2. The ideology: this is hardish line jihadist, which seems initially centred on getting rid of foreign influences in Somalia and setting up an Islamic state - and it does just touch on the same George Bush involvement (p 4) as the Guardian article, in similar terms. This is what seemed to lie, immediately, at the heart of the Nairobi attack - the Kenyan military involvement within Somalia; hence the retaliation factor. Nothing very unfamiliar.

And so it seems to cover much the same ground as arguments about Russia's 'right' to enact oppressive legislation against its citizens, and how rotten it is for outsiders to criticise them for that.

You'd have thought that certain members would approve.

[fragonard]

And so it seems to cover much the same ground as arguments about Russia's 'right' to enact oppressive legislation against its citizens, and how rotten it is for outsiders to criticise them for that.

You'd have thought that certain members would approve.

The quote is irrelevant.

Long term lurker here. I have refrained from commenting on all topics until now.

I am Kenyan. I lost my father and grandfather in the Nairobi attack. I saw their bodies. I then read your pathetic 'reasons'.

[Deleted: offensive language - ff]