SO now we know – with the worst terrorist attack in France since the Second World War, it is clear that there is nothing that the barbaric forces of ISIS will stop at in their crusade to spread fear, intimidation and mayhem across the world.

The events in Paris show once again that it is the democratic countries who are targets, the innocent who are vulnerable and the peaceful who pay the price when ISIS use their own brand of inarticulate terror to spread their 'message'.

But as our hearts go out to those massacred in Paris and the families they have left behind, we also have to look to our own shores, our own defences, our own vulnerabilities and the threat posed by our own home grown crop of Jihadists. We have to ask ourselves, in Britain and indeed right across Europe, what we have to do to defend the core values of our society – the values of Peace, Tolerance and Liberty. We have to ask ourselves what we will be prepared to give up in terms of inspections and inconvenience to ensure our own streets and gathering places are safe.

And we have to face hard questions – about passenger profiling on aeroplanes, or enforcing zero tolerance for extremist teaching and practices - that will run counter to the sometimes flabby rhetoric of multiculturalism that many have espoused for so long.

Of course, we celebrate diversity and Britain is a richer place for its cultural mix and religious tolerance and of course we can’t demonise people on the basis of appearance or religion. We must always respect our reputation as a place of sanctuary for those escaping terror.

But to wipe out this poisonous extremist ideology we have to be clear that there is no place for it, in any form, in Britain. To fail to condemn these attacks is to support them. To suggest that the French atrocities were revenge for Western actions in the Middle East is outrageous. And to fail to recognise that the world is changing and that a full spectrum response of military power, counter-terrorism and anti-extremism measures, backed up with new investments in cyber security and Special Forces capabilities are not necessary, is simply short-sighted.

Locally, any talk of military action has a personal slant and representing as I do thousands of armed forces personnel and their families, if I am asked by the Prime Minister to consider voting for military action, I have to think incredibly carefully about the consequences and consult those I represent. I stand by ready to listen.