Terror Attack: 130 Dead in Paris

[Idaho]

The point is that you can't impose democracy. Democracy is the will of the people. You have to ACCEPT democracy.

When the gazans elect hamas we have to accept democracy and work with it. In Iran we defended a dictator against the democratic will and when that will exploded we were left with the mess that is modern Iran. In Saudi we did the same and created a state that exported radical politicised islam. Etc. It's all so tedious and repetitive.

[Pannonian]

The point is that you can't impose democracy. Democracy is the will of the people. You have to ACCEPT democracy.

When the gazans elect hamas we have to accept democracy and work with it. In Iran we defended a dictator against the democratic will and when that will exploded we were left with the mess that is modern Iran. In Saudi we did the same and created a state that exported radical politicised islam. Etc. It's all so tedious and repetitive.

So let us stop here. Rather tan agonise over what we've done in the past, which we can't do squat to correct, as our every action is considered wrong in some way or other, we should just raise our borders to the Muslim world, which is where most of the trouble comes from. What they do in their world is their business, and none of ours. If anyone then chooses to become part of that world, let them; just don't allow them back. I was raised a liberal, and in most respects I remain one, and I opposed the attack on Iraq. But I'm tired of (far right) Muslims taking offence at our every action, and bleeding heart liberals telling me to be guilty about things I had nothing to do with. I enjoy the many cultures that London contains, and I wouldn't want to homogenise it. But there are some positions that are antithetical to the liberal world that I love. Islamism is one.

[Idaho]

So let us stop here. Rather tan agonise over what we've done in the past, which we can't do squat to correct, as our every action is considered wrong in some way or other, we should just raise our borders to the Muslim world, which is where most of the trouble comes from. What they do in their world is their business, and none of ours. If anyone then chooses to become part of that world, let them; just don't allow them back. I was raised a liberal, and in most respects I remain one, and I opposed the attack on Iraq. But I'm tired of (far right) Muslims taking offence at our every action, and bleeding heart liberals telling me to be guilty about things I had nothing to do with. I enjoy the many cultures that London contains, and I wouldn't want to homogenise it. But there are some positions that are antithetical to the liberal world that I love. Islamism is one.

All I see here is emotional response. Why do you give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by? And who is asking you to feel guilty?

Look at the situation rationally. What are it's causes? Then start to work out what needs to be done. The same knee jerk responses are coming out from the same mouths. Insanity is doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results.

[Pannonian]

All I see here is emotional response. Why do you give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by? And who is asking you to feel guilty?

Look at the situation rationally. What are it's causes? Then start to work out what needs to be done. The same knee jerk responses are coming out from the same mouths. Insanity is doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results.

The causes are radicalised Muslims, often homegrown, but usually passing through radicalisation centres in Pakistan or other places abroad. Once they get to this stage, there is no re-assimilation possible. So cut the trouble at the stage where they get to be radicalised abroad, and cut the sources of radicalisation at home by restricting what can be preached here, mainly by restricting who can preach here.

As for why I should give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by, it's because it's the trigger by which already radicalised Muslims find the excuse to perform or plan their latest atrocity. There is no rhyme and reason to cutting the sources of offence for such, because it's already got to the stage where they're looking for an excuse, any excuse, to perform their act. Bleeding heart liberals point to what we do or don't do abroad as why we should feel guilty about provoking such actions, but there is no escaping the route down which these idiots have already decided to go. Whatever we do or don't do, is pointed to as evidence of our guilt, both by these radicalised Muslims (and their allies abroad), and the bleeding heart liberals at home. As such, these arguments are practically irrelevant. They do nothing to stop these acts. The only way to stop them is to stop the radicalisation process in the first place, or to keep their adherents from coming here.

[Idaho]

Do you suppose that it is realistically possible to conduct a widespread war across a large area of the globe, while keeping your own local corner of the world free from any war like events?

[Pannonian]

Do you suppose that it is realistically possible to conduct a widespread war across a large area of the globe, while keeping your own local corner of the world free from any war like events?

I'd prefer us not to conduct any war at all. I was against the Iraq war, as I stated above. I was against intervention in Syria. I am against intervention in Ukraine. And everywhere else where people are appealing to our sense of "right". The Iraqis, Syrians, and everyone else can do as they like in their patch of the world; I care not. And in return, I wish that they would not trouble us with their issues; I care not. Do something, as in Iraq, and the west is criticised for doing something. Do nothing, as in Syria, and the west is criticised for doing nothing. I favour doing nothing, and blocking their nationals from entering our land, as at least that would be cheaper and would get the same result of them hating us.

[Idaho]

I think you're being emotional and resorting to absolutes.

You are seeing everything in terms of us and them. Neither of which are remotely simple and cohesive groups. The majority of "them" have no interest whatsoever in "us". They get on with their lives.

Warzones generate these groups. Mujahaddin were generated by the Russian afghan war. Taleban by the subsequent civil war. AQ from a mix of the two plus Saudi political oppression. Mahdi army and IS by the Iraq war. Now the Syrian war creates and proliferated more.

Guns, training, propaganda, grievance. Those are the soil and growing conditions for terror attacks. The simplest way to generate all is to create Warzones.

[Fragony]

The point is that you can't impose democracy. Democracy is the will of the people. You have to ACCEPT democracy.

When the gazans elect hamas we have to accept democracy and work with it. In Iran we defended a dictator against the democratic will and when that will exploded we were left with the mess that is modern Iran. In Saudi we did the same and created a state that exported radical politicised islam. Etc. It's all so tedious and repetitive.

Are you going to respect the will of parties that strongly disagree with immigration? Not directed at you but the (radical) left has their 'ground-troops' so to say. Islamism wouldn't be a problem in the west without multiculturalists.

[Kagemusha]

Apparently one of the attackers had a Syrian passport. Like i have been saying from the start in the Isis thread. We cant defend from terrorists who hate everything we are and they are poised to succeed with their attacks every once a while.

Only way to deal with these nazis of Islamic world is to deploy at Syria and Iraq and either bring to justice or kill every last one of these lunatics. More we wait harder it will become.

[Fragony]

Apparently one of the attackers had a Syrian passport. Like i have been saying from the start in the Isis thread. We cant defend from terrorists who hate everything we are and they are poised to succeed with their attacks every once a while.

Only way to deal with these nazis of Islamic world is to deploy at Syria and Iraq and either bring to justice or kill every last one of these lunatics. More we wait harder it will become.

Syrian pasport means nothing, 500 a pop for a Syrian pasport in Turkey, 600 for an AK in Brussels.

[Kagemusha]

Syrian pasport means nothing, 500 a pop for a Syrian pasport in Turkey, 600 for an AK in Brussels.

Yes and what does it matter if you can get one cheap? Are you claiming this is some sort of conspiracy to frame IS?

[Fragony]

Yes and what does it matter if you can get one cheap? Are you claiming this is some sort of conspiracy to frame IS?

No Turkish maffia just jumped in, Forged Syrian pasports is big business there, nobody has any idea who's who here. Mutti Theresa invited them and that's really all I want to say right now. My thoughts are at the misery of those who had to see all this right now

[Brenus]

"France lost this war when the sons and grandsons of immigrants were ostracized from society. This chapter has already been written."
Minister of Justice: Rachida Dhati: Typical ostracized immigrants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachida_Dati
Rama Ayad: Another one oppressed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_Yade
Najat Vallaud-Belkacem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najat_Vallaud-Belkacem

My dear, if the Islamist attack France it is because France represents all what they hate. France embraces life when they embrace death, France values liberty, they value slavery, France values equality, they value discrimination, France values Fraternity, they value racism.
France embraces science, secularism, they prefer superstition and obscurantism.
To summary it, let give me the message from a caricaturist Joann SFAR:
"Friends from the whole World, thanks you for your #pray for Paris, but we don't need more Religion! Our faith goes to music! Kisses! Life! Champagne! Joy! Paris is about life".

They value death, so they attack life