13/11 Attacks on Paris

[Blaze The Great]

In related news, ISIS also issued a video threatening to cause a "bloodbath" in Russia.

Yeah, I noticed that on CNN while looking for news about the attacks. That...makes no strategical sense, to say the absolute least.

[VROOOOM]

I heard about that earlier. Thank God for those people.

I'm replying to Dragonlord BTW. Don't want this to be taken the wrong way.

Edited November 14, 2015 by punk emblem

[Tetragrammaton]

Well, US bombing Syria, Syria exports refugees to EU.

You can find culprits among those refugees.

[Sniper Knight]

Everyone who's mentioning or supporting the razing Syria/Iraq: you do realize that ISIL consists of 20,000, as the CIA claims, out of the ~60 million people who live the two countries, right? 60 million is 60,000,000, with seven zeroes, by the way. 20,000 out of 60,000,000 is 0.0003% of the people that live there. Even going by the largest estimates, 200,000, as Kurdistan claims, ISIL makes up 0.003% of Syrians and Iraqis. Not all of the members of ISIL are located in Syria or Iraq either.

And you know why? Because they spent time there trying to pick out the evil and simply created more.

The only way to stop these people who are hellbent on your death is to kill them. And everyone around them just to wipe them out. If nobody exists, no more evil exists.

In plain words, it would take a genocide to stop these people entirely. And am I saying to do it? Maybe I am because I know that they want me dead for sure. But that's the cold hard reality of the situation. You cannot reason with these people. Sometimes, extreme measures need to be taken, even if it costs us our souls.

I doubt you understand even the implications of what you're suggesting. Genocide is by no means a word to be tossed around lightly. Would you really be willing to kill millions of completely innocent people, people just like us, for the sake of eradicating a relatively small radical group that many of them don't support? In my opinion, declaring war on terrorism is a terrible idea, but if it becomes an absolute necessity, yes, eliminating ISIL is justifiable. But to take millions of innocent people with them? To murder all of them, people who have done nothing wrong, just to get rid of not even 1% of them? Committing genocide can never be justified.

[dondon151]

Well, US bombing Syria, Syria exports refugees to EU.

You can find culprits among those refugees.

i don't think we know that the culprits behind these attacks came in with the refugees

[dragonlordsd]

Well, US bombing Syria, Syria exports refugees to EU.

You can find culprits among those refugees.

Actually, it's the "returnees" that are the suspects, not the new arrivals. (Ie, people who lived in the country, went to Syria, and came back)

The thing about the refugees is it really sucks to be them. I mean, they are legitimately trying to escape from people like this, people who more or less destroyed their home country, and yet the violence still follows them.

These pictures of the children of refugees: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/08/world/cnnphotos-syrian-children-refugees-sleeping/

This is why I have to be mad at you for that statement. I mean, you're probably right, but these kids don't deserve this.

[-Cynthia-]

Even if it isn't the new refugees who are directly responsible, they're still going to get at least some of the blame. I wouldn't surprised if European countries increase their border security even more. It's unfortunate that a few radicals are probably going to ruin things for everyone else.

[Rehab]

Well, US bombing Syria, Syria exports refugees to EU.

You can find culprits among those refugees.

Around 2013 and 2014, a solid portion of Syrians wanted some intervention in Syria, to be sure, since well before most people (including me) had heard of ISIS. The start of the whole coalition bombing thing came long after the country had shattered into fragmented, shifting territories, and probably long after many Syrians had given up hope. There were over 2 million refugees way before all that.

If one wants to bring up Syria and the cascading waves of chaos its destruction as a state helped to create, I heard years ago that Assad was sandbagging and ceding territory to ISIS, in order to get them and other, less batshit-crazy rebel groups in the area fighting each other. You want to talk about resentment, I'd be surprised if any given Syrian wasn't exhaling it constantly on cold days, and for a hundred different reasons that don't even involve the coalition or religion directly.

I mean, like when Putin got Assad to surrender the stockpiles chemical weapons and get them finagled out of the country to be disposed of? I remember hearing the bulk response of Syrians on the ground being that they barely cared. It just meant nobody was coming to help with everything else.

E: But even with the worst of that, Syrian refugees are far from necessarily the go-to culprit for any Islamic terrorist attacks or ISIS supporters. Like, IIRC most of the ISIS fighters in Syria are foreign to the country in the first place.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Rehab

[ZoesMad]

Even if it isn't the new refugees who are directly responsible, they're still going to get at least some of the blame. I wouldn't surprised if European countries increase their border security even more. It's unfortunate that a few radicals are probably going to ruin things for everyone else.

European countries also are taking a relatively low percentage of the refugees right now (although it will increase in time.) One of my biggest worries for the refugees is that countries who already have admitted refugees and closed their borders (Lebanon and Turkey primarily) are going to start becoming hostile towards their refugees and either neglect them further, or outright remove them from their country. Such a terrible situation.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

I know it's a very difficult comparism, but are there any similarities to the terror attacks at Charlie Hebdo in the beginning of this year?

(I know that the consequences of the latest attack are immense larger)

It's the second time within one year that Paris is in the sight of terror attacks.

The lastest information are: >150 victims and >8 terrorists died.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Mister IceTeaPeach

[Magical CC]

This must be related to the Russia airplane case. There's no way ISIS could be able to shoot down an airplane flying at high attitude with their rocket and the route of the airplane is far away from ISIS territory.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Magical CC

[-Cynthia-]

European countries also are taking a relatively low percentage of the refugees right now (although it will increase in time.) One of my biggest worries for the refugees is that countries who already have admitted refugees and closed their borders (Lebanon and Turkey primarily) are going to start becoming hostile towards their refugees and either neglect them further, or outright remove them from their country. Such a terrible situation.

Yes...it looks like this may have already started. http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619361/Calais-Jungle-migrant-camp-fire-Paris-terror-attacks

[Tetragrammaton]

I know it's a very difficult comparism, but are there any similarities to the terror attacks at Charlie Hebdo in the beginning of this year?

(I know that the consequences of the latest attack are immense larger)

It's the second time within one year that Paris is in the sight of terror attacks.

The lastest information are: >150 victims and >8 terrorists died.

I think we can blame the French security force for poorly working.

Charlie Hebdo always makes fun of other country tragedy, I wonder how they would make fun of their own tragedy this time.

'Just wait…' Islamic State reveals it has smuggled THOUSANDS of extremists into Europe

Whether it's true or not, hard time for refugees is coming.

[blah the Prussian]

What we cannot do: Ignore ISIS. For the love of god, pacifism is stupid. I thought they all stopped being pacifists after WWII, but I was wrong, apparently. There are not many people who have moral equivalence with the Nazis, but ISIS do. Tell me, Water Mage, would you advocate non violence to people actually living in regions threatened by ISIS? To the man watching his wife be stoned to death for not wearing a burqa? To the mother watching her children made into child soldiers? To, for that matter, the Jew being herded into gas chambers? Would you advocate thenPoles reacted non violently to the Nazi invasion? That the US reacted non violently to Pearl Harbor?

What we need to do: Stop ISIS.

How to do that: The US, EU, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Russia need to get on the same page regarding who to prop up in the region. I personally would recommend convincing Assad and the rebels to work together against ISIS. Failing that, though, we should support Assad over the rebels, because Assad is the strongest force in the region. He should be seen as the Stalin to Bagdadi's Hitler. The US needs to accept Russian dominance in Syria to beat ISIS, much like we accepted Russian dominance in Eastern Europe to beat the Nazis. Now, if Assad is toppled, we should restore the Syrian monarchy under the House of Hashemite. I'm not just saying this because I'm a monarchist; a monarchy provides a symbol against Islamic extremism that no politician can. Why do you think ISIS has yet to penetrate Jordan while it is tearing apart Iraq and Syria? The same goes for Iraq. Overall, while it is all well and good to react to these attacks by demanding the destruction of ISIS, now is the time to actually have a plan on how to do this without killing everyone in the region.

[Magical CC]

We used to have some guys who can fill the black hole of power in Arab but they are all dead now.

[blah the Prussian]

We used to have some guys who can fill the black hole of power in Arab but they are all dead now.

What about the Hashemites?

[Water Mage]

Tell me, Water Mage, would you advocate non violence to people actually living in regions threatened by ISIS? To the man watching his wife be stoned to death for not wearing a burqa? To the mother watching her children made into child soldiers? To, for that matter, the Jew being herded into gas chambers? Would you advocate thenPoles reacted non violently to the Nazi invasion? That the US reacted non violently to Pearl Harbor?

I would tell them to not lower themselves to their level. For example killing someone because they killed someone important to you would make you no different than the killer.

Of course this example is small-scale copared to what happened yesterday, but the idea is still the same.

And before you ask, I'm not some naive kid that doesn't know how the world works. I may be idealistic, but I'm no fool, and yes I've seen it happen before, not as large-scale as this, but it was still bad.

Of course something must be done to stop them, but simply charging in, guns blazing, isn't the right way.

You would kill them, but some would survive and seek revenge against you, and thus they would kill innocents again, and because innocents were killed, you realize that you have to take action and kill those who killed the innocents, and yet again some would survive and the whole thing repeats itself.

See what I'm getting at? It would create a pointless cycle of revenge.

I won't claim to know what have to be done, but before resorting to violence, think about it, is there really no way to resolve this without resorting to war?

[Magical CC]

What about the Hashemites?

I could rather choose Assad over them. They have no real power. You need a strong, resolute and powerful man to handle the mess. Someone like Hassan II, Gaddafi or Saddam. Libya people were more wealthy and their living standard was much higher under Gaddafi reign than under the current government even when Gaddafi hoarded a ton of treasures for himself. Saddam did suppress the minor tribes but those who supported were well treated and big cities in Iraq were a lot more wealthy than now.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Magical CC

[Water Mage]

Now that I think about it, earlier that day, wasn't there a bomb threat on the hotel where the german soccer team was staying?

I wonder if there's a connection or if it was just a hoax.

[Tetragrammaton]

I could rather choose Assad over them. They have no real power. You need a strong, resolute and powerful man to handle the mess. Someone like Hassan II, Gaddafi or Saddam. Libya people were more wealthy and their living standard was much higher under Gaddafi reign than under the current government even when Gaddafi hoarded a ton of treasures for himself. Saddam did suppress the minor tribes but those who supported were well treated and big cities in Iraq were a lot more wealthy than now.

That's why they were killed by the West.

Western started to mess thing up, now shit got hit in their face.

It's funny that's no one really care about Libya, Syria, Iraq when they are under terrorism actions from Western countries, million people were killed, but no westerner care.

What a double standard value.

Edited November 14, 2015 by hanhnn

[Rapier]

'Just wait…' Islamic State reveals it has smuggled THOUSANDS of extremists into Europe

Whether it's true or not, hard time for refugees is coming.

I see it as reasonable to invest in tighter border control. Ok, we are morally compelled to help those who are in need, but not when doing so increases the chances that smuggled terrorists will cause terror in your own country, putting innocent people's lives on danger out of a reckless humanitarian policy. We first help and protect those who are close to us, then the others. This doesn't mean to turn our backs on refugees, this means we should be more careful instead of simply letting them in.

Also, was it confirmed that it was caused by smuggled extremists or were those caused by returnees who helped extremists get inside? I haven't seen any info on this.

What about the Hashemites?

Not sure if that royal family is strong or supported enough for it. While I admit that an authoritarian government helps keep a population on its reins, it won't happen if no one respects the authority in power. They might be just overthrown by another rebel group that might surge after IS disappears.

[blah the Prussian]

I would tell them to not lower themselves to their level. For example killing someone because they killed someone important to you would make you no different than the killer.

Of course this example is small-scale copared to what happened yesterday, but the idea is still the same.

And before you ask, I'm not some naive kid that doesn't know how the world works. I may be idealistic, but I'm no fool, and yes I've seen it happen before, not as large-scale as this, but it was still bad.

Of course something must be done to stop them, but simply charging in, guns blazing, isn't the right way.

You would kill them, but some would survive and seek revenge against you, and thus they would kill innocents again, and because innocents were killed, you realize that you have to take action and kill those who killed the innocents, and yet again some would survive and the whole thing repeats itself.

See what I'm getting at? It would create a pointless cycle of revenge.

I won't claim to know what have to be done, but before resorting to violence, think about it, is there really no way to resolve this without resorting to war?

You really are naive if you think this is about revenge. This is about stopping people like ISIS, Nazi Germany, and Imperial Japan from hurting any more people. This is about defending yourself, and those important to you. You say it creates a cycle of revenge, but Germany and Japan are both prosperous, democratic nations on good terms with their former enemies. The same can be said of most of the nations in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Egypt and Jordan were the former enemies of Israel, and now thanks to e efforts of Anwar Sadat and King Hussein respectively (and of course the Israelis) they are, if not allies, not enemies either. Tell me: if you are so opposed to war, how would you have us solve this?

I could rather choose Assad over them. They have no real power. You need a strong, resolute and powerful man to handle the mess. Someone like Hassan II, Gaddafi or Saddam. Libya people were more wealthy and their living standard was much higher under Gaddafi reign than under the current government even when Gaddafi hoarded a ton of treasures for himself. Saddam did suppress the minor tribes but those who supported were well treated and big cities in Iraq were a lot more wealthy than now.

Um, yes they do. Their power is on par with Hassan II. Abdullah II is both popular and resolute; more importantly, he doesn't gas his own people and is thus significantly more popular.

[Luxian]

You know what, I'm stunned when I learned it in the morning.... I was a bit dizzy but when I realized some of my frends might have been killed... I couldn't get my mind cleared up... That's so messed up.

I heard President Hollande reinforced the borders... But why was there no better border check ? And what's the point in just doing this when some terrorists are lurking in the shadows ? The vigipirate plans everywhere, closing schools... How will the situation improve if we stay hidden ? I don't claim to know what to do but, he should focus on aerial strikes and internal attacks too ! And don't blame all refugees, it's our fault for not checking them more, the true refugees were just fleeing Syria... i understand they will get a hard time but you can't put everyone in the same bag. Same goes for Muslim, never considered those fanatics as muslims. I don't claim to know much about that religion, but I know it has values, that terrorists do not seem to understand.

And if you want to know about some news, there was a threat message about them looking forward a retaliation because WE killed their "brothers" ?! I don't believe it for my part, because who are the ones destroying our structures killing our people with boms and so on first ? I'm not defending our governement, that makes too much mistakes these past years, but their are in no right to state such a childish reason. Civilians didn't do anything to them ! As harsh as it may sound, if the governement or the army were killed, it would be more legit than killing civilians. But don't misunderstand I would not want them killed either. Also I don't think they are in right to call each other "brothers" since they are a bunch of murderers who brainwashed young people to join them. But I will hold back on religious issues here.

And now some friends have gone saying it is a plot, others say that the far right (the FN party) might take advantage of it for next elections.. But somehow we agrees the biggest mistake of President Hollande is that he tries to play hero and blindly follows the US without thinking twice. He turned down Russia's alliance proposal (if I remember correctly) because "Russia are the bad guys not listening to the US", and attacked Syria or whatever country to please US governement, and about the consequences ? He cannot do anything anymore... What US do might be right or worng, I don't know how they proceed, so I won't say US strategy or modus operandi, so I have no right to criticise, but US are an ocean apart so terrorists will have a harder time to retaliate, not to mention about their defense... But our President who just blindly attack them while we are just next to them and without a proper defense... That's completely rash ! Well that's about the state of mind of some french people... Of course not everyone's.

I admit being a bit scared as well, but really, if I fall into paranoia, then they got what they want right ? I'll just live like I usually do. But I'm mentally prepared for other attacks to happen and maybe not just Paris this time..e

[Water Mage]

You know what, I'm stunned when I learned it in the morning.... I was a bit dizzy but when I realized some of my frends might have been killed... I couldn't get my mind cleared up... That's so messed up.

I heard President Hollande reinforced the borders... But why was there no better border check ? And what's the point in just doing this when some terrorists are lurking in the shadows ? The vigipirate plans everywhere, closing schools... How will the situation improve if we stay hidden ? I don't claim to know what to do but, he should focus on aerial strikes and internal attacks too ! And don't blame all refugees, it's our fault for not checking them more, the true refugees were just fleeing Syria... i understand they will get a hard time but you can't put everyone in the same bag. Same goes for Muslim, never considered those fanatics as muslims. I don't claim to know much about that religion, but I know it has values, that terrorists do not seem to understand.

And if you want to know about some news, there was a threat message about them looking forward a retaliation because WE killed their "brothers" ?! I don't believe it for my part, because who are the ones destroying our structures killing our people with boms and so on first ? I'm not defending our governement, that makes too much mistakes these past years, but their are in no right to state such a childish reason. Civilians didn't do anything to them ! As harsh as it may sound, if the governement or the army were killed, it would be more legit than killing civilians. But don't misunderstand I would not want them killed either. Also I don't think they are in right to call each other "brothers" since they are a bunch of murderers who brainwashed young people to join them. But I will hold back on religious issues here.

And now some friends have gone saying it is a plot, others say that the far right (the FN party) might take advantage of it for next elections.. But somehow we agrees the biggest mistake of President Hollande is that he tries to play hero and blindly follows the US without thinking twice. He turned down Russia's alliance proposal (if I remember correctly) because "Russia are the bad guys not listening to the US", and attacked Syria or whatever country to please US governement, and about the consequences ? He cannot do anything anymore... What US do might be right or worng, I don't know how they proceed, so I won't say US strategy or modus operandi, so I have no right to criticise, but US are an ocean apart so terrorists will have a harder time to retaliate, not to mention about their defense... But our President who just blindly attack them while we are just next to them and without a proper defense... That's completely rash ! Well that's about the state of mind of some french people... Of course not everyone's.

I admit being a bit scared as well, but really, if I fall into paranoia, then they got what they want right ? I'll just live like I usually do. But I'm mentally prepared for other attacks to happen and maybe not just Paris this time..e

First of all, I'm glad that you are safe, I was worried about our french members, since there a lot of them here.

And I sincerely hope things will get better for you all.

Second, you said exactly what I wanted to say. That right now blindly attacking the Islam is very bad idea.

Eagerly jumping into a violent solution, without thinking of other possibilities will only cause more deaths on both sides.

People are angry now, but they gotta think things through.

[Corrine]

I live in Paris, and a lot of friends live in the area where the attacks happened. My brother was at the Bataclan the day before.

A lot of my friends could have been there. We all know someone who was injured. This is a fucking nightmare...

Edited November 14, 2015 by Corrine