Terror Attack: 130 Dead in Paris

[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.

[Husar]

Is it really any surprise that they are targeting Paris?
They blew up a plane with 224 Russians and people asked "Will Putin become more barbarian now?"
Now they killed 150 people in Paris and all of Facebook is changing profile pictures and crying "We are not affected at all".
If I were a terrorist, I'd plan my next attack in Paris to see all the people I hate cry...

[Montmorency]

Is it really any surprise that they are targeting Paris?
They blew up a plane with 224 Russians and people asked "Will Putin become more barbarian now?"
Now they killed 150 people in Paris and all of Facebook is changing profile pictures and crying "We are not affected at all".
If I were a terrorist, I'd plan my next attack in Paris to see all the people I hate cry...

They should target Berlin so that Merkel can use the incident to take on certain emergency powers...

[Montmorency]

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

The irony, and the core of the problem, is that the West does not have a monopoly on war.

Strike is correct to call Islamism a "contagion". At this point there is nothing we can do other than to let the violence run its course.

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

[Kagemusha]

The irony, and the core of the problem, is that the West does not have a monopoly on war.

Strike is correct to call Islamism a "contagion". At this point there is nothing we can do other than to let the violence run its course.

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

Let the violence run its course? Isis are saying that they want to decapitate Obama at the white house, besides using pre puberty girls as sex slaves, burning people alive as witches, chopping off hands for use of cellphones and using ten year old child soldiers as executioners in the videos and you think that they are like ill behaving children whom be nice once again after they have had their fun?

[Husar]

So what's next? The "Endlösung of the Islamfrage"?
Why do we need a solution to this? Around 1k people get shot in the US every year and no one needs a solution.
Some people are crazy, nothing we can do...

[Graphic]

So what's next? The "Endlösung of the Islamfrage"?
Why do we need a solution to this? Around 1k people get shot in the US every year and no one needs a solution.
Some people are crazy, nothing we can do...

Actually around 8 or 9k.

[Pannonian]

So what's next? The "Endlösung of the Islamfrage"?
Why do we need a solution to this? Around 1k people get shot in the US every year and no one needs a solution.
Some people are crazy, nothing we can do...

The US can do whatever it likes. This attack happened in the EU.

[Montmorency]

Let the violence run its course? Isis are saying that they want to decapitate Obama at the white house, besides using pre puberty girls as sex slaves, burning people alive as witches, chopping off hands for use of cellphones and using ten year old child soldiers as executioners in the videos and you think that they are like ill behaving children whom be nice once again after they have had their fun?

Don't take my words so lightly. The only way to stop killing is to give people their fill of death. After that, only then can we talk about structural or cultural reform.

I am speaking of a region-wide civil war in which millions would die.

Western countries would simply defend their own territories.

[Kagemusha]

Don't take my words so lightly. The only way to stop killing is to give people their fill of death. After that, only then can we talk about structural or cultural reform.

I am speaking of a region-wide civil war in which millions would die.

Western countries would simply defend their own territories.

Without the backing of the West and East. IS will run over the middle East,North Africa and Arabian peninsula. You want to fight them at that point? They would probably slaughter quite many people in the process, but not reform. It is not as if the Slaughtering millions reformed Nazi Germany either. No it was determined countries who defeated them and forced them into submission.

Same will apply with the extreme islamists. We simply should grant them their wish and deliver them from this world. They are not going to reform.

[Husar]

The US can do whatever it likes. This attack happened in the EU.

In France to be exact, you can't just have your EU when you want to be annoyed and want to leave it otherwise.
The rest of what you posted is coherent though, but not exactly practical or enforceable unless you want to create some kind of DDR border to keep the poor out.
And that still doesn't explain why people from the US tell us to "wake up" or why no one used a Russian or Turkish flag profile picture on Facebook. Is it just because Hollande is more sympathetic than Putin and Erdogan or just because it is closer to home? If deaths far away are more acceptable why do the same people have strong opinions about violence in Israel and Palestine?

[Pannonian]

In France to be exact, you can't just have your EU when you want to be annoyed and want to leave it otherwise.
The rest of what you posted is coherent though, but not exactly practical or enforceable unless you want to create some kind of DDR border to keep the poor out.
And that still doesn't explain why people from the US tell us to "wake up" or why no one used a Russian or Turkish flag profile picture on Facebook. Is it just because Hollande is more sympathetic than Putin and Erdogan or just because it is closer to home? If deaths far away are more acceptable why do the same people have strong opinions about violence in Israel and Palestine?

I'm a Europhile. Despite my banter, I see France as the next closest thing to Britain. The US may be kin, but France is closer in geography and in how we see the world.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In France to be exact, you can't just have your EU when you want to be annoyed and want to leave it otherwise.

The majority of Britons quite like the eU - but we want to see a serious effort to root out the corruption in this pseudo-super-state where nobody will sign off on the accounts

The rest of what you posted is coherent though, but not exactly practical or enforceable unless you want to create some kind of DDR border to keep the poor out.

It's called a Limes and it was effective enough at keeping your people out so long as we kept it well manned.

It's also the foundations of the states. Turkish flag is the traditional crescent, while the Saudi flag is the sword below "No God But God" anachronism. Saudis have successfully characterized Islam as a violent struggle. The country was built by the events almost identical to what's going on in Europe and IS. Breaking shrines, executions, genocide, and conquest.


This is all a result of that revivalist movement that is now the Muslim identity.

All of this can be shown to have been carried out by early Muslims either within Muhammed's lifetime or immediately following it.

In the other thread you demonstrated a breathtakingly miss-informed understanding of Christianity alongside a disappointing knowledge of early Islamic Scholarship, trying to tell me Muhammed didn't have a nine-year old wife.

Now your contribution to this thread appears to tell us that these Muslims aren't proper Muslims, like you.

Strike is right - you bring nothing to this discussion, no insight or reflection.

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/14/our_terrorism_double_standard_after_paris_lets_stop_blaming_muslims_and_take_a_hard_look_at_ourselve s/

Notably, the article does not cite any of these other "EU" terror attacks, only the ones outside the EU which happened either in a war zone or on the edge of one.


Also notable is the attention given to the Far-Right Norwegian and Swedish terrorist attacks and the soul-searching after Norway in particular when everyone was forced to acknowledge that we all assumed it was a Muslim and not a poster-boy for Nazi Eugenics.

In other news Hollande called this an "Act of War" after IS claimed responsibility, assume we are headed for Afghan War 2.0.

So yay for military contractors and arms manufacturers and a hearty sob for everyone else.

[Pannonian]

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.

We've had multiple homegrown groups who've not been involved in any war, but who began radicalisation with extremist preachers here, before completing their extremist education in Pakistan and other radicalisation centres. Some of them gravitate to warzones. Others seek to create a warzone here. Their supposed grievances include things where we did something, and sometimes they include things where we didn't do anything. These grievances are merely the excuse for what they do. What they aim to do is create a headline. They get their desire to create a headline from their radicalisation. If we try to address one grievance, they merely point to the reverse as what we should have done instead, or point to something else as justification for what they do. They're just excuses. Radicalisation is the reason.