Terrorist attack in Paris

[Bethrezen]

Be a colonizing country;
Make money by exploiting free human resources;
Get rich;
Slavery is abolished;
Some of the ex-slaves who served for the colonizing countries migrate to their "masters";
Be arrogant and ignorant enough not to integrate them;
Keep bombing their home countries for $$$;
Complain about them not wanting to integrate, rioting and/or comitting terrorist acts in support of their countries of origin, culture and religion.

Not to mention disconsidering people dying in Middle East, just because "there are dying people every day there, so it's not important". You could drop nuclear bombs there tomorrow and the majority of the Western civilized citizens wouldn't give a damn.
Also, France stating that they are at war with ISIS? Aren't they at war with them since they bombed them the first time? What was their relationship until now? Pact of non-aggression? Trade? This is very dangerous nowadays, you can bomb someone without being at war with him... Interesting.

[Earl Dibbles Jr]

Be a colonizing country;
Make money by exploiting free human resources;
Get rich;
Slavery is abolished;
Some of the ex-slaves who served for the colonizing countries migrate to their "masters";
Be arrogant and ignorant enough not to integrate them;
Keep bombing their home countries for $$$;
Complain about them not wanting to integrate, rioting and/or comitting terrorist acts in support of their countries of origin, culture and religion.

Not to mention disconsidering people dying in Middle East, just because "there are dying people every day there, so it's not important". You could drop nuclear bombs there tomorrow and the majority of the Western civilized citizens wouldn't give a damn.
Also, France stating that they are at war with ISIS? Aren't they at war with them since they bombed them the first time? What was their relationship until now? Pact of non-aggression? Trade? This is very dangerous nowadays, you can bomb someone without being at war with him... Interesting.

Alright, since you feel colonialism is relevant to this I'd like to present some facts to you.
Arabs have owned millions of slaves and some could even argue that the conditions of workers in Arabic countries today closely resembles that of slavery.
The spread of Islam killed hundreds of millions of people, a majority of which were in the Middle East, Northern Africa, and India.
Whites in Greece and the Balkans were sold by the Ottoman Empire into slavery following their successful Jihads and conquests.

[Bethrezen]

Alright, since you feel colonialism is relevant to this I'd like to present some facts to you.
Arabs have owned millions of slaves and some could even argue that the conditions of workers in Arabic countries today closely resembles that of slavery.
The spread of Islam killed hundreds of millions of people, a majority of which were in the Middle East, Northern Africa, and India.
Whites in Greece and the Balkans were sold by the Ottoman Empire into slavery following their successful Jihads and conquests.

Did I say anything about Arabs? Do you mark all African and Middle Eastern people as "Arab"? Interesting.
Also, I was talking about European colonialism since it's relevant to the topic. If you like to discuss off-topic, don't let me bother you.

[DisgruntledGoat]

regarding having guns to stop attacks. This gun advocacy group staged re-enactments of the Charlie Hebdo attacks with paintball guns in an attempt to prove that if just one person had a gun the attack could have been averted. They failed miserably.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ebdo-paintball

[Phier]

regarding having guns to stop attacks. This gun advocacy group staged re-enactments of the Charlie Hebdo attacks with paintball guns in an attempt to prove that if just one person had a gun the attack could have been averted. They failed miserably.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ebdo-paintball

One volunteer, playing a civilian, was also armed with a paintball gun.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...inary-results/

I know the gun control activists will want to point to this as definitive proof that armed defenders are useless, but that’s simply not the case. Not only is there insufficient data to draw any conclusions whatsoever, but we’ve previously proven that in some cases armed defenders are nearly 100% effective at stopping similarly armed attackers. What we are investigating now is the probability of success in different scenarios, and by playing with the variables we can get a better understanding of how best to protect ourselves and our loved ones.

Highly trained "terrorists" untrained shooters, still made a difference, and only one had a gun. So what do you think this proves?

[Condottiere 40K]

1772
The situation in the Middle East won't improve, because their countries are going arid, and oil prices aren't going to recover for at least a decade, barring a war, so they won't be able to afford to import food.

[Knight of Heaven]

Did I say anything about Arabs? Do you mark all African and Middle Eastern people as "Arab"? Interesting.
Also, I was talking about European colonialism since it's relevant to the topic.

No it is not.
What Africans have anything to do with this atacks? with ISiS or radical islam?
ISIS btw are the ones currently advocating for slavery, and sex slaves included.
Nice hypocrasy on your part.

regarding having guns to stop attacks. This gun advocacy group staged re-enactments of the Charlie Hebdo attacks with paintball guns in an attempt to prove that if just one person had a gun the attack could have been averted. They failed miserably.

Of course they did. The porpuse of a good ambush, is so your target doesnt see it coming.

[Mithradates]

If given the choice of carrying a gun and wearing a flak jacket, I would personally choose the jacket because a gun doesn't stop you being shot in the back or shrapnel entering your body, which is precisely what happened to most of the victims that night and it also isn't likely to harm others. But putting on a flak jacket to see a concert is as extreme as carrying a loaded weapon, so perhaps we should just concentrate on preventing this sort of thing happening at all.

So true.

[athanaric]

Did I say anything about Arabs? Do you mark all African and Middle Eastern people as "Arab"? Interesting.
Also, I was talking about European colonialism since it's relevant to the topic. If you like to discuss off-topic, don't let me bother you.

Arab/Islamic colonialism is just as "on-topic" here as French colonialism, since it's one of the reasons for the terrorists' sense of entitlement.

[VINC.XXIII]

Be a colonizing country;
Make money by exploiting free human resources;
Get rich;
Slavery is abolished;
Some of the ex-slaves who served for the colonizing countries migrate to their "masters";
Be arrogant and ignorant enough not to integrate them;
Keep bombing their home countries for $$$;
Complain about them not wanting to integrate, rioting and/or comitting terrorist acts in support of their countries of origin, culture and religion.
.

Colonialism, the eternal pretext of congenital losers to justify their parasitism.

They can't be integrated, not because of all the 90 milliards of euros we spent in their ghettos, not because of their schools which are the exact same that ones of autochtones, not because RACISM is forbidden in France, not because french taxes are used to finance anti racist papers and horrors like the film Samba.

They can't because...they're aliens. My grand-father was a poor illiterate sheppard who crossed Alps without shoes, nobody have "integrated" him, he did it himself. Just as a bunch of portugueses, spaniards, polish guys whose children belong now to french medium-classes.


Go spend a month in Stains or Marseille-Nord...

[pajomife]

"They don't change our way of life" .Germany - Netherlands cancelled,also Belgium -Spain cancelled, ISIS 2 - Europe 0, lets see the England - France....

[Stavroforos]

"They don't change our way of life" .Germany - Netherlands cancelled,also Belgium -Spain cancelled, ISIS 2 - Europe 0, lets see the England - France....

Don't forget Supergirl wasn't shown on Monday.

[Phier]

Don't forget Supergirl wasn't shown on Monday.

Thats at worst a draw.

[PointOfViewGun]

Waiting 10 minutes for law enforcement sure worked out well for the people in that theater.

It didn't in this case. It might in an other.

"They don't change our way of life" .Germany - Netherlands cancelled,also Belgium -Spain cancelled, ISIS 2 - Europe 0, lets see the England - France....

You're saying that they didn't use to take precautions in case of an imminent attack?

[Akhenaton]

Eh... don't be so hard on our Americans. They get shot by dumb school kids often enough. But seriously, wouldn't you want to have at least some kind of defense in such a situation? Would you prefer to just get ripped apart with no option to fight back? Maybe you would find your courage with an assault rifle in your hands?

I didn´t mean to be so mean. I don´t wan´t to take anyones favorite toy away. If I had an assault Rifle in my hands I´d have the courage to take on the whole if ISIS
No, but serious now, of course I don´t want to be blown to bits and yes I do think about taking a gun and killing the attackers, but I know that such a case wouldn´t end good, not because I died, but
because I probably made the situation even worse for everyone around. If I think of courage in such situations, I think of the man who threw himself on a terrorist in Lebanon. He lost his life but saved everyone around him. Or I think of everyone who came and helped the victims, I believe such acts of kindness, goodwill and humanity to be very important.

I don't think you get how this game is played.

If someone were to walk into say a concert like in Paris and start shooting, you are 100% correct the first few people, armed or not, won't have a chance to fight back.

They don't matter in this case they were dead anyways.

What does matter is there are 100's of others now who are becoming quickly aware of the danger and are not directly being shot at yet.

It takes about 3 seconds to assess a threat and about 2 seconds to draw. In 5 seconds anyone close could start shooting back at said terrorists.

Is it a perfect solution, can there be issues and errors of judgement? Yes, but its better than just dying.

Now here is the funny part, I couldn't do that in the US in many states. Why? Because something like a concert is a "gun free" zone. Gun free zones are bad ideas put in place by politicians to make people without a clue feel better. It doesn't stop criminals, only the law abiding. A theater in the US could be just as helpless as Paris.

In one mass shooting recently, the attacker picked the one theater in his area, not because it was the biggest or closest but because it was the only "gun free" one.

You make it sound very clean, but somehow I don´t believe that it would run so smoothly. I agree with you on the first part (to my bad luck, because I prefer to stay further back from a crowd), but the ability to draw a gun in 5 seconds, while being drunk and partying hard I would at most expect from grizzled special force member. Besides concerts can sometimes be rough places and if I knew that everyone was drunk and carrying a gun it wouldn´t make me feel safer in the first place. As for the Gun-Free Zones, I don´t think that terrorists would shy away because people might carry guns. It certainly never stopped them to do attacks in the middle east, when there were soldiers around, especially not in military camps, where you would expect the people best suited for combat. Overall other users before brought up some good points why combat in such a situation would be very difficult and unlikely to end well.

I think though that we´re getting off topic with this subject and it should go in it´s own thread (I believe there are already two?) for people to discuss the pro and contra.

On another note, the guardian published this interesting eye witness report of a french imprisoned by ISIS:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-paris-attacks

Some, but not all, interesting bits:

...they [ISIS] follow the news obsessively, but everything they see goes through their own filter. They are totally indoctrinated, clinging to all manner of conspiracy theories, never acknowledging the contradictions.Everything convinces them that they are on the right path and, specifically, that there is a kind of apocalyptic process under way that will lead to a confrontation between an army of Muslims from all over the world and others, the crusaders, the Romans.....
They will be heartened by every sign of overreaction, of division, of fear, of racism, of xenophobia; they will be drawn to any examples of ugliness on social media....The pictures from Germany of people welcoming migrants will have been particularly troubling to them. Cohesion, tolerance – it is not what they want to see.

Arming ourselfes, closing the gates to anyone who really seeks refuge here and in general becoming paranoid and distrusting of anyone strange could bring us the opposite effect of what we are trying to achieve, that is the end of ISIS and this nihilistic form of extremism. For in our efforts our fears might make us also turn to the extreme and fear is the enemy of reason.

Why France? For many reasons perhaps, but I think they identified my country as a weak link in Europe – as a place where divisions could be sown easily. That’s why, when I am asked how we should respond, I say that we must act responsibly.

However the situation in the middle east is too much of a mess. The Acteurs who made it all can't just leave and hope it turns out well. The Car is too deep in the mud. In a perfect world a politic of small steps, meaning to remain calm in the inner politics and reasonable in foreign politics could lead somewhere good, but I have no real trust in that.
Maybe we should oblige the terrorists and don our red crusader crosses over white tunics. They'd jeez at the sight of it It's also funny that they have beef with the 'Romans', even though the Romans came 600 Years before Islam, but then again, what have the Romans ever done for the ME?


I'd also like to bring somethin to attention, which to me hasn´t yet been really discussed. It is clear, that this is an attack on the ´west´ but I think it is also an attack against muslims who want to live different lives. How so?
When Syrian refugees heard of the attacks in Paris the next day, many where agast and terrified. It seems the violence they are trying to escape follows them even into safe europe. They also know that any actions by fundamentalists will cause a reaction by local extremists against them.
But I want to bring up one specific individual whose fate is outright symbolic for all of this struggle. His name was Amine Ibnolmobarak, he was born in Morrocco and made his studies in architecture and teached at the ENSA Paris-Malaquais architecture school. His graduate study had been on the architecture of Mecca to which he had also done his pilgrimage. He was gunned down in Paris along with his wife (who lies heavily wounded in a hospital). By all our standards he was a modern integraded young man who had also kept his own cultural identity. Yet he was killed, because he represents something that is even more hated than us, by people who claim to have the pure religion, but in truth their thinking is nihilistic. They hate western intellectuals just as much as muslim intellectuals (and prophets! Remember the tomb they blew up two years ago?) have no culture and aren´t interesting in developing a new one. It is as dogukan has said, it is not old conservatism but a new form of extremism, where they wish to rule through blood and violence, devoid of anything else. To call their belief a religion is mockery of any religion out there. The people fleeing this war are on the same side as us.
Picture of Amine Ibnolmobarak

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Source

So before we call for the bombardmend of entire cities and the eradication of anyone in the IS state, we should first consider, how that helped in the past and how we can change our
policies for the future.

But that´s just my view, I don´t know if there will really be war or not, right now I get the impression that we are sleepwalking a bit, not unlike our ancestors a hundred years ago.

Anyway, after my anti-gun and perhaps-we-should-be-more-careful-about-this-war stance I´m off to shoot something as Gaige in Borderlands. See ya later

[Thorn777]

thorn literally what are you talking about? the arab spring is a Saudi project?

some of the leaders that were ousted by the Arab Spring were friendly with Saudi Arabia such as Ben Ali and Mubarak. Morsi was also thrown out and he was Muslim Brotherhood, that is also an anti-Saudi change. Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait saw mass protests and these countries are partners with Saudi Arabia.

in Yemen during the Arab spring, there was unrest in Sanaa which of course does not bode well for Saudi Arabia



LOL



maybe the far-right

"Arab spring" is the wrong wording. I was in a haste this morning. I should have rather said "foreign policy including steering the arab springs to desired directions". Saudi's big threat is a revived pan-regional alliance after having a big role in the pan-arabic demise and on that route with the US made enemies everywhere. Syria is the last one of them around. Egypt's Military regime isnt in this group no more after showing a clear dedication to become part of the Washington Consensus and Saudi/Emirates/etc Investments economically and coming to terms with Israel and the Saudi's. The Mubarrak clan although also alligning with the US, has been doing so for real-politiek reasons and previous Nasserist defeats and might have changed their allignements in case US retreats longterm from the region and allign with an intact Lybia, Syria, Iraq, Iran etc. All these countries could behave entirely differently if each comes from a position of strength and possible alliances.

If you look at the map today, no such scenario is possible within years of a US foreign-policy retreat. And it is not like they are done yet. They actually met big set-backs in Syria.

That the arab-springs in Oman etc where surpressed by the very same Saudi. That and that no one in the west cared gives testimony to my theory. Also the western tolerance of Erdogan and his tolerance for radical-islamic militants is testimony to my theory. I see Erdogan and his often misunderstood as "illusions of grandeur" foreign-policy ambitions and the Saudi's as a sort of tag-team to long-term devide hegemony over the region in a very rational manner.

These two are the two big regional players left. Both alligned with the US. Both balls deep involved with radical islamic militants. Both support different degrees of radical sunni versions of Islam. Both doing very well for them selves within international capitalism also because they are favoured politically and part of what looks like the winning team.

[RubiconDecision]

Yes but when you actually study stuff, it is possible to face the reality that the reason people are coming over to US or Europe is the right-wing in the first-place.
Left simply argues that these people are coming to core countries due to the systemic problems caused...the periphery pays for it.
Right on the other hand is more relevant to internvetionist policies in the rest of the world, such as wars or economic expansion into developing world since right cooperates with big capital owners who hate labour rights around the world.

Immigration is labour diffusion.
USA was built by it as was the rest of the Americas.
If you think immigration on a mass-scale is wrong, then you should struggle against globalization and core-country oriented, imperialistic or neo-colonialistic capitalism.
But as a street-smart right-winger who is pointing out to obvious, you will never see the contradiction between being anti-immigration and being pro-borderless capital transfer.

(Sigh). You obviously haven't thoroughly read my posts, because not only am the most pro-legal immigration person there is, but l've spent my life in refugee advocacy. While I could certainly agree with many of your thoughts, and I feel like I can understand a thoughtful educated sincere Leftist, there is no sympathy for Jihadists. They are the worst kind of monster attacking random innocents as a response to "injustices".

Your post hints at a respect of Communism. I would urge you to investigate the massive genocide of millions, oppression, labor camps, discrimination, purges, etc that are the evidence of the utter evil of Communism in practice. Start with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and the Gulag Archipelago. I'd recommend reading about Victor Herman too.

[Victor Restes]

Start with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and the Gulag Archipelago.

Solzhenitsyn is the best argument in favor of the gulags.

If paranoid bigots and racists like him are the typical Soviet prisoners, then you will see that they were punished way too mercifully.
If I were the Soviet authorities, then I would try to take my inspiration from the Imperial Japanese Army, something between the aftermath of Nanjing and the Bataan Death March is more appropriate for Solzhenitsyn and his likes than a simple imprisonment somewhere in Siberia.

[pajomife]

It didn't in this case. It might in an other.




You're saying that they didn't use to take precautions in case of an imminent attack?

I'm just saying the something that our politicians say,"they won't change our life and our values",and other BS,they want to maintain the same policies about immigration and integration of minorities,even with a daily evidence of it fail,if in the prosperity time Europe couldn't integrate this communities now in time if economical crises some mad politicians still inviting and allowing people from middle east to come to our lands? For what?I really don't see any benefits of it for us,maybe for them that came here to live at our expenses,and do things like that in Paris as payment.

[snuggans]

"They don't change our way of life" .Germany - Netherlands cancelled,also Belgium -Spain cancelled, ISIS 2 - Europe 0, lets see the England - France....

i'm enjoying the England vs France match with a cold one to be honest, i usually root for England but feel France should win this one due to the occasion. that Alli goal was beautiful though, makes up for him missing that earlier cross, i was like "who is this 19 year old starting for England"

they're still playing while simultaneously searching for 2 fugitives who are believed to still be in the country, and this group can get their hands on explosive vests, so keep that in mind