For any posts in German there is a translate button. Just scroll mouse over the top right side of post.

Might be the Chrome translate to English option, not Google.

Only when you're logged in to a Twitter account.

There was no emoticon:

Firstly, my thoughts go to all the families of those killed in this incident and hope the death toll doesnt increase.

As for all the speculation, it does seem that even the Germans are confused, as the police were clearly saying it was an attack and the lorry was deliberately driven into the crowd, then the politicians got in the act and said that it could be an accident.....

Hopefully this is cleared up quickly, as rampant speculation isnt good for anyone.

That's why I can't see it then.

In that case i can't much help other than rough translate. Sorry i thought it gave translation whichever browser. Maybe it varies.

I found it baffling that Tony would believe that the aim of terrorism is to cause retaliation by the west (normal, law-abiding citizens), who would then rise up against Muslims in the west so that, "back home" more Muslims could then point the finger at the west and then enlist more jihadis. The whole picture that that paints is rather silly, IMO.

Let's face it, no-one here knows what really makes an extremist tick, but it's fair to say that they already have an axe to grind, and necessitating the kicking of "Muslim ass" in order to gain support is completely unnecessary and self-defeating.

It isn't their sole aim but it is certainly a factor. It isn't silly at all.

Islamic terrorist attacks are themselves retaliation for the way western powers have conducted themselves in the Middle East for generations.

Do we all agree with that, or am I losing the plot here?

Which does not rule out what the other poster said, which you seem to think is silly.

Islamic extremists want a global Islamic state. They want to conquer Muslim countries and conquer non-Muslim countries. To achieve this they need the support of Muslims, and they see a clash between Muslims and non-Muslims as a way to unite Muslims behind them.

How we respond should not be determined by what they think; but by our desire for the world to be free of Islamist tyranny.

Saying that they want us to kick their asses, so that they can radicalize more people (who will then become terrorists, causing us to kick yet more Muslim ass, ad nauseum) makes no sense whatsoever.

People who feel victimised are easily radicalised.

People who feel accepted are not easily radicalised.

Associated Press now reporting Berlin Police have said the death toll is now 12
Link

I'm not so sure of that. If they had a magic wand I dare say that they'd use it to that end, but in the real world nobody seriously wants or expects to take over the world, like a James Bond baddie.

It doesn't matter whether they expect it or how realistic their aims are. What matters is that they are prepared to kill thousands of people - Muslim and non-Muslim - in support of their aims. They are more prepared to fight their enemies than their enemies are to fight them and that is why this war is still going on over 15 years after 9/11.

Serious question - do you / have you read the papers, watched the news / reports on tv the last few years etc etc etc? You don't seem to know what's going on outside your own front door.

Of course. And obviously radicalizing people is big on their agenda. I don't think they fight in order to be defeated in order to fight more only to be defeated more though. It's a circular argument.

Radicalising people is what that poster was on about. That's what this pages long bafflement has been about!

You could make the same point about miltant atheists in the way they are dogmatic about their beliefs.

I would dismiss the theory anyway. The number of people in the world who are religious believers would easily be into the billions, which would make a nonsense of the idea of them all being mentally ill.

Surely the aim of terrorism is to instil terror. What they actually want is something else, somewhere else. Say, total sovereignty over what they believe to be their own land, for example. What we're really talking about is a power struggle, and since they're powerless to defend against what they see as their suppressors they take the fight to the streets, to the people, where it can't be ignored.

If coalition forces left the Middle East completely and just let them get on with it, and we continued to buy oil off them at a fair price, do you think they'd still want to "take over the world"?

Why has Christianity numbers fallen so drastically in recent years in the Middle East?
Why are they persecuted, forced to convert?
Bethlehem 1946 Christians were 60%, now 2%
Egypt? Churches targeted in Cairo. Worshippers at Coptic Chapel killed 12th December
Syria?
Iraq?
To mention a few

Actually there was one or two posts between me and Tony where I was baffled, the other 25 pages was me having to explain myself repeatedly well after Tony and I had finished talking, coupled with members of the assembled clique chipping in to talk at cross purposes.

There's only you, blueblade and a couple of others who have actually conducted a reasoned debate without any assumptions about my character. Honestly, once people are upset woe-betide anyone who dares to consider things dispassionately. DS does my ****ing head in at times.

Because the world's in a mess? I don't know. Why are you asking me?