No idea, it's an opinion, however, many nations have suppressed many other nations and it's historically atypical for the aggrieved to lash out to others of indirect involvement. Have Congolese (after the conflict ended) gone and bombed Belgium, or why not Albania, who had no relation to Belgium's involvement?

It's not about some abstract historical notion of right and wrong. The US has created an environment that fosters terrorism. Whether this is wronger or righter than any historical colonialism by other countries is completely irrelevant. We've created "the YC for terrorists" in the countries we have smashed in the Middle East, and now there is a lot of terrorism.

Ok, so what makes the ME react differently to meddling compared to SE Asia?

My first attempt at an answer would be the breadth and depth of the meddling involved.

That being said, could you provide examples as to how the Middle East has reacted to meddling as opposed to South East Asia?

Look at Thailand, a land with many masters over the millennia, India, china, British, Japan. Yet there is only a certain faction involved in terrorism there, their society at large doesn't feel the need to engage in antiwestern terrorism.

Death cult?

Besides not being directly relevant, it's also a facile and simplistic view of the situation. Sayyid Qutb, the godfather of al-Qaeda's ideology, was famously "radicalized" by going to a sock hop in Colorado in the 1950s. No economic wars, violent dictator support, et cetera was required.

There will always be crazies, but crazies like Qutb would likely not have as many supporters if they didn't have a wide base of people with real reasons to dislike the US to draw from.

No idea. Also no idea why the GP isn't being downvoted.

Just because some politician claimed that it's tech's people responsibility to fix their flaws, it does not make it true.

It's repetitive, but the police did have all the information they needed to go after such people even before the murdering. What does the GP want? A machine that queries the news from the day after tomorrow? (Because tomorrow won't do - the police had warning that it would happen at the previous day.)

Clearly I didn't get my point across.

If the Paris police had all the information they needed to go after such people, but didn't, that's the technical problem that really needs solved, not an encryption backdoor.

I agree that you've identified a problem. I don't agree that it's a technical problem. It seems to me that technology simply doesn't offer any solutions to this kind of problem. Perhaps that's a failure of imagination on my part, though: what are some areas of research you think might cause law enforcement to start responding to credible threats?

Metadata analysis and pattern recognition of publicly available data is one.

Better data organization tools are another (a family member is studying forensic science and has done internships with large-ish police departments that still largely use printed and hand-written documents to manage cases)

But that's my point. I haven't done much thinking on this either, so I can't see around the corners of time to see what it could be. But just more yelling back and forth about encryption isn't accomplishing much.

Maybe it's not a bits and bytes technical problem, but it's technical according to the definition of the adjective, "of or relating to a particular subject, art, or craft, or its techniques." If the Paris police had the information, but were unable to properly analyze it, that's completely a technical problem.

Ah, I agree on that front. That does make sense.

But I still don't think this should distract from a conversation about encryption. Encryption has very importat implications for free press and privacy far outside of preventing terrorism, and it's important that it stay legal and accessible to normal people. Experts need to make their voices heard so that legal decision isn't made by people unconcerned with these important issues.

Well, that's not a technical problem.

Maybe it's not a bits and bytes technical problem, but it's technical according to the definition of the adjective, "of or relating to a particular subject, art, or craft, or its techniques." If the Paris police had the information, but were unable to properly analyze it, that's completely a technical problem.

It didn't address the parent's point, other than by saying you don't care about it. Your point may be valid but it belongs in a separate thread.

It's not a productive line of argument. We want to keep doing those things. Might as well say that the solution to traffic accidents is for everyone to stop driving.

> We want to keep doing those things.

Speak for yourself. I'm an American citizen and I don't want to start economic wars, support violent dictators, create economic sanctions that harm the common people and not the national leaders they purport to, provide conditional and earmarked aid that is sometimes actually harmful, and a wide variety of other internationally sociopathic behaviors. I think most people would agree if they actually understood that that's what's happening. But most people think we're spreading peace and freedom and protecting human rights.