Could be. At this point we're all just speculating.
Could be. At this point we're all just speculating.
rob_lewis wrote: ...But, I agree with the question of why the French instead of Britain or the U.S. Perhaps because France is the closest "western" country to attack? -Rob
France has a rather large population of people with few jobs, poor prospects and no chance of citizenship that can be turned into a-holes by pushing the right buttons (which the ISholes have gotten rather good at).
So yes, basically, they are the easiest "western" target.
rob_lewis wrote: But, I agree with the question of why the French instead of Britain or the U.S. Perhaps because France is the closest "western" country to attack?
I doubt that, they've got enough long-standing social problems to come up with the occasional bunch of home-grown terrorists. IIRC the people involved in the last two terrorist attacks had that sort of background, wouldn't surprise me if these folks fall into that category as well.
As aircooled pointed out above, there is a whole bunch of essentially disenfranchised and marginalised people living in France whose families are (mostly) from North Africa. Algeria in particular, their parents or grandparents came over in the early 60s during the civil war in Algeria. Even though a lot of them were French citizens, they were often treated as second class citizens and essentially ghettoized - that's how they ended up in the suburban high rises in the 'banlieu'. E36 M3 has been hitting the fan in these places regularly for decades, not helped by heavy handed policing of the "shoot first, then trigger a riot later" school.
IOW, perfect breeding ground for lots of crime and more recently, terrorism.
most speculation reports to ISIL on this one. Al Qaeda does more surgical strikes, liked they did with Charlie Hebo. They went in, took out the cartoonist, and left with minimal damage to the other people in the building. ISIL tends to just go in and kill everyone.
Yesterday they killed for 40 in Lebanon in territory held by Hezbollah. You would think that the enemy of my enemy is my ally, but ISIL is either you are one of us or you are the enemy, not much room for wiggle room there.
They are hurting at the moment though, between JJ getting droned and the Kurds taking that highway they use for supply runs, they are feeling a pinch
I thought that 15 people were killed and 11 injured with Charlie H? Doesn't seem that surgical... Nor does crashing planes into the twin towers....
I fear that things are going to get much worse before they get better.
mad_machine wrote: Al Qaeda does more surgical strikes, liked they did with Charlie Hebo. They went in, took out the cartoonist, and left with minimal damage to the other people in the building. ISIL tends to just go in and kill everyone.
ISIS has claimed responsibility.
France and Paris in particular have a large non-integrated Muslim population. Because France wont change to suit their Muslim culture, the Muslims, especial the young ones, are easy targets for ISIS recruiters who claim to act on their behalf. The ISIS debacle has been running long enough that many "veterans" have finished their tour of duty in the middle east, and returned to the west either to retire or pursue agendas from within.
What has always amazed me is that France knows of hundreds who have gone and returned, and yet the names are not made public. These people need to be treated like sex offenders. Canada is in much the same situation and about to get a lot worse with the recent arrival of Syrian imports. The problem with refugees, is that the only reason that many of them are refugees in the first place, is because they got done-unto before they could do-into.
As to sterilizing the region, its a rather large swath of real estate that you are looking to cover.
In reply to SVreX:
Yes. If indeed ISIS are the perps of this act, then it's a game changer, and we can expect to see more of this in Europe and perhaps even here in North America. I know we say we're not going to let terrorism stop our lifestyle, but it sure will make me think about it whenever I'm in a restaurant or sports event, etc. I'll be looking for the exits, and have several defensive action plans in mind based on the venue. (Even if that might not change the outcome, at least it'll make me feel better that I'm being pro-active).
How sad and horrible. My thoughts are with them.
Gary wrote: I I know we say we're not going to let terrorism stop our lifestyle,
You are kidding right...You must not have boarded an airplane since 2001. Or noticed the creation of something called "Homeland Security" that has been given carte-blanche to stomp all over what used to be private citizen rights?or the endless troop deployment to random countries that may or may not pose a threat?
The war on terror was lost that day and the Western World has been living in fear ever since. When I see a Muslim person, I don't know if I should be more afraid OF them or more afraid of offending them.It's complicated!
I laughed when way back in 2008 I walked into a casino and the first thing I see is a huge TV screen keeping me appraised of the fact that the terror alert level for the day was "Orange". Because like, that is information that I can really use for any rational decision making. I think the airports have finally stopped doing that particular PSA every 20 minutes.
In the grand scheme of things, the Paris massacre is no different than the occasional shooting rampages we see in NA; just something that we have to accept and get used to as the price of a modern society. I have already forgotten where the last mass shooting in NA was and expect that we will have another within a few months. Same deal with ISIS.
In reply to NOHOME:
You obviously misinterpreted my post and did a pretty good job of offending my intelligence to further your point of view. Of course I've traveled by air, etc., since 2001, and am aware of everything else since then. And I spent a week in Paris last May, and know the area where these attacks happened. So let me explain: Here in the USA the general sentiment has been not to change one's lifestyle due to a potential terrorist attack, (i.e., still travel on airplanes and trains, still go to major attractions and sporting events, popular restaurants, nightclubs, etc.). We endure the "safeguards" that have been put in place. Maybe that's not the case in Canada, and hence your response. The point I made is that I personally will continue to do those things, but maybe think more about how I might be able to survive a potential attack instead of putting my head in the sand. I'll now step away to another conversation so as not to perpetuate this rebuttal of your comment.
we are reaping the benefits of all the war in Iraq. We created ISIL by invading and kicking all the sunni out of Iraq's military. We created the chaos that bred them, trained them, and gave them a reason.
NOHOME has it right with the thought of "non-integrated" Muslims. By not integrating or even welcoming our newest neighbors into our part of the world, we give them reason to turn inwards, this festers and fosters the very kinds of beliefs that lead to this.
Don't treat your average Muslim like the enemy and they won't become one. With over a billion of them in the world today, it takes less than 1% radical to make it seem like all of them are out to get us
In reply to mad_machine:
well said
I wonder if we'll look back in 20 years at the current events and think "well, that was E36 M3ty but things are so much better now." Or if the conflict between progress/freedom/western culture and ISIS zealots will continue like a festering sore in the side of the world in perpetuity.
The two sides can't hope to win using their current techniques so I don't have much hope.
KyAllroad wrote: The two sides can't hope to win using their current techniques so I don't have much hope.
Well one down a billion more to go...
http://www.france24.com/en/ I am glued there. Live streaming English language French version of CNN
It's funny how we all become geopolitcal experts afters such a thing. Even I am given to saying, "If we just..." These are complex issues... No quick or easy fixes.
In reply to KyAllroad:
The people in power, on both sides of the situation, gain nothing by ending the conflict but gain much by encouraging it. It will never end, unless there is a more lucrative conflict to promote.
WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Cold War, The Gulf, Hezbollah, ISIS, and on and on and on. If they beat this one, there is another ready and willing to take it's place.
I have no faith in our leadership, or theirs, to end anything.
True. It's impossible to to even know what path should be taken even if our "leaders" could follow through with anything. Do we: A) preach love, compassion, tolerance and eventually win over a group whose stated aim is to put all non-believers to the sword? or B) round up 1,000 "faithful" for every attack and feed them to pigs?
Wasn't it a Caesar who said "I care not if they love me so long as they fear me." Or words to that effect. The west has shown amazing restraint so far in the war with ISIS, but eventually I fear we're going to have to take off the gloves and get ugly. Too bad Muhammad's misbegotten children can't have a heart to heart with Japan. Glass ing a city or two seems to be the only way to reach some people.
//end rant. Sorry, it just gets to me.....
I don't like the idea of glassing the middle east, but if you wanted to parachute a big nuke down into the middle of Mecca and have it connected to a popular vote detonator, I could buy in. Kinda like "American Idol" for Islamic Jihadist.
mad_machine wrote: we are reaping the benefits of all the war in Iraq. We created ISIL by invading and kicking all the sunni out of Iraq's military. We created the chaos that bred them, trained them, and gave them a reason. NOHOME has it right with the thought of "non-integrated" Muslims. By not integrating or even welcoming our newest neighbors into our part of the world, we give them reason to turn inwards, this festers and fosters the very kinds of beliefs that lead to this. Don't treat your average Muslim like the enemy and they won't become one. With over a billion of them in the world today, it takes less than 1% radical to make it seem like all of them are out to get us
We did not create this situation in the modern age. True, the "average Muslim" is not what caused this mayhem. The radicals represent many, many more than the 1% you stated. In reality, the "radicals" are in the multi-millions. We can love our peace loving Muslim brethren. But there will still be many, many radicals that will hate us for historical reasons. That hate is ideological, and goes back centuries ... to the Crusades and before. So this isn't a recent problem. The reason for this unfortunate event in Paris isn't because the French gov't hasn't given jobs to the disenfranchised Muslims in Paris. It's an ideological religious problem that's been going on for centuries. They chose to embrace radicalism. We didn't just create it. The solution is not easy. It will only get worse until radicalism is countered with radicalism. The peace loving German citizens didn't care about what happened to the Nazi's in the 1940s. The peace loving Muslims shouldn't care what happens to the radical hate mongering Muslims now.
NOHOME wrote: I don't like the idea of glassing the middle east, but if you wanted to parachute a big nuke down into the middle of Mecca and have it connected to a popular vote detonator, I could buy in. Kinda like "American Idol" for Islamic Jihadist.
The problem with this theory is that you will never get them all. Ever.
The key is trying to figure out why people can be so easily convinced to end their life's to do this. Fight the way, and you will lessen the numbers.
Otherwise if we just kill, people will step in to be the next to strap on a vest.
Gary wrote: The radicals represent many, many more than the 1% you stated.
I am not picking on your post.. but I wanted to point something out.. 1% of 1.5 billion is 15 million. Current estimates of ISIL fighters is 20,000 to 30,000 strong. Clearly not 1%
I would just like to see more denouncing coming from the peaceful Muslim community.
The white supremacy factions are denounced by the average whites.
The "Christian" groups like "God Hates Fags" are denounced by the mainstream Christians.
Is it possible to turn on AL Jazeera and see peaceful Muslims holding a peace rally at the local town square?
Sample: Here is a public denouncing of the Mormon practice of gay discrimination. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/11/14/protest-of-mormon-lgbt-policy-draws-hundreds.html
Where are the peaceful Muslims taking a public stand against radical Muslims?
In reply to JohnRW1621:
And I don't understand that as well. We keep hearing how Islam is really a peaceful religion, but the peaceful ones don't seem interested in engaging what's going on.
I know that Christians have historically demonstrated violence, too- but the peaceful ones seem to overwhelm the violent ones in reasonably short order (although, that may be re-writing history a little).
JohnRW1621 wrote: I would just like to see more denouncing coming from the peaceful Muslim community. The white supremacy factions are denounced by the average whites. The "Christian" groups like "God Hates Fags" are denounced by the mainstream Christians. Is it possible to turn on AL Jazeera and see peaceful Muslims holding a peace rally at the local town square? Sample: Here is a public denouncing of the Mormon practice of gay discrimination. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/11/14/protest-of-mormon-lgbt-policy-draws-hundreds.html Where are the peaceful Muslims taking a public stand against radical Muslims?
You wont see the Muslim population at large denounce the radicals, because at heart they need to support them for their own vision.
I suspect that one of the reasons that the mainstream Muslim religion supports the radicals is because the Muslim religion favours a non-secular government system that will tell them what to do and how to live their lives. They very much want their religious and civic leaders to be the same. ISIS feeds this vision.
You'll need to log in to post.
