Paris attacks: More than 120 killed at Bataclan and restaurants

[compl3x]

 

Never in our history have countries been able to defeat terrorists by brute force.  Never.  Fighting terrorists has always made more terrorists.  US interventions in ME are prime example of that.  Look at how long it took for a Russian jet to go down after Russia got involved in ME.

In order to defeat terrorism, or come close to it, you have to defeat countries that sponsor terrorism, and when it comes to ME, almost every country is guilty of doing so.  There is no other way.  You can put a billion soldiers on the ground and in a generation or two, children of slain terrorists will rise up again.  It's inevitable.  

And how do you defeat these countries, exactly? What will the existing terrorists do when you start to attack their support network? Pack up and go home? You object to targeting terrorists themselves but seem to advocate full-scale war against anyone who we think is funding them? What basic evidence would you demand be presented before we could go ahead with ""defeating countries"" we accuse of supporting terrorists? I am honestly not sure what you are proposing here besides engaging the terrorists directly doesn't work".

[techbeck]

Not a very religious person these days, but my thoughts go out to the family and friends of the victims.  Wish there was something I could do...but not much I can.  I know that if something happened to someone I cared about, I wouldnt want to read or see some to these comments...arguing back and forth.   Show some respect.

[Gone]

 

Keystone XL has nothing to do with Alaska.  And you think the President will make the military go against some of the closest allies the US has?  You want to defeat terrorism, you have to deal with your allies first.  Heck, even US sponsors terrorists....

Thanks for the correction.

 

Why is Saudi Arabia an ally? Oil? The US already is against Israel, one our best allies.

 

Yes you are right, we are responsible for putting the leaders in Iran, Iraq, etc. I think that if we had a president and congress with some balls and morals, our stance would be: If you support terrorism you are an enemy, if you are an enemy and you harm Americans or America's ally's we will utterly destroy you. 

There is too much evil in this world and today (yesterday) is a perfect example. I wish I could say that Europe has nothing to worry about, but unfortunately it has much worse to fear. It all starts with those "refugees" followed by the gun laws.

[+Warwagon MVC]

I haven't read up on this, but is this an out come of agreeing to take in refugees? Did they take any?  Where some of them the ones doing this?

[compl3x]

Not a very religious person these days, but my thoughts go out to the family and friends of the victims.  Wish there was something I could do...but not much I can.  I know that if something happened to someone I cared about, I wouldnt want to read or see some to these comments...arguing and bitching back and forth.   Show some respect.

Do you honestly think that the wanton slaughter of 140 people doesn't merit discussion? What would be disrespectful is to say nothing and pretend the problem doesn't exist, resulting in another similar attack 6 months down the track.

[ctebah]

 

And how do you defeat these countries, exactly? What will the existing terrorists do when you start to attack their support network? Pack up and go home? You object to targeting terrorists themselves but seem to advocate full-scale war against anyone who we think is funding them? What basic evidence would you demand be presented before we could go ahead with ""defeating countries"" we accuse of supporting terrorists? I am honestly not sure what you are proposing here besides engaging the terrorists directly doesn't work".

Well lets see.  The US is both directly and indirectly arming terrorist networks in Syria/Iraq.  That would have to stop but it won't.  They want to defeat Assad.  Turkey has almost an open door policy towards ISIS and I don't even want to start on Saudi Arabia.  Not even Iran is innocent.  Nowhere did I say we should wage war against those countries, but there's a way to 'defeat' them from supporting terrorists.

[Gone]

I haven't read up on this, but is this an out come of agreeing to take in refugees? Did they take any?  Where some of them the ones doing this?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/all-about/calais-migrant-crisis

The camp was attacked after the attack, various European countries are taking in these refugees and presumably it should be easy for them to travel around the rest of Europe once in? 

[ctebah]

Thanks for the correction.

 

Why is Saudi Arabia an ally? Oil? The US already is against Israel, one our best allies.

 

Yes you are right, we are responsible for putting the leaders in Iran, Iraq, etc. I think that if we had a president and congress with some balls and morals, our stance would be: If you support terrorism you are an enemy, if you are an enemy and you harm Americans or America's ally's we will utterly destroy you. 

There is too much evil in this world and today (yesterday) is a perfect example. I wish I could say that Europe has nothing to worry about, but unfortunately it has much worse to fear. It all starts with those "refugees" followed by the gun laws.

You see, I don't think that Saudi Arabia is an ally of the west due to it's oil.  That's a very common misconception.  US/Canada and Europe get very little Oil from them, Saudi's export a lot towards Asia nowadays.  The reason Saudis are allies is because they give land away for free for the construction of bases.  Just look up how many air bases US has on Saudi territory.  They also have an extensive information network and share their data with the West.  Saudi's also buy a lot of weapons and are set to increase their purchases in the future.  Yes, oil does play a very important part of the conflicts in the ME but it's not just oil that there's wars there continuously.  

[compl3x]

 

Well lets see.  The US is both directly and indirectly arming terrorist networks in Syria/Iraq.  That would have to stop but it won't.  They want to defeat Assad.  Turkey has almost an open door policy towards ISIS and I don't even want to start on Saudi Arabia.  Not even Iran is innocent.  Nowhere did I say we should wage war against those countries, but there's a way to 'defeat' them from supporting terrorists.

And what is this way? How do you convince countries not to pick sides in a conflict? If you have an interest there, you will get involved. I'm afraid you've offered no solution.

[T3X4S]

 

Never in our history have countries been able to defeat terrorists by brute force.  Never.  Fighting terrorists has always made more terrorists.  US interventions in ME are prime example of that.  Look at how long it took for a Russian jet to go down after Russia got involved in ME.

In order to defeat terrorism, or come close to it, you have to defeat countries that sponsor terrorism, and when it comes to ME, almost every country is guilty of doing so.  There is no other way.  You can put a billion soldiers on the ground and in a generation or two, children of slain terrorists will rise up again.  It's inevitable.  

 

 

They have been getting attacked by female pilot for a while now, and that didn't stop them.  A lot of those terrorists don't even care for religion, except to attract foreigners from other countries.  Clearly killing them in droves hasn't worked as now there are even more of them.  You have to attack the source first.  

OK - someone proposed a glass parking lot - you were one of the 2 who said that wont work - you said "brute force has never worked" then gave examples of boots on the ground.

I am not saying we destroy a part of the globe for the next thousand years - with untold fallout collateral damage - but you haven't been able to knock down that person's suggestion of a nuke.  There wouldnt be any little mosque-praying terrorists to avenge their parents. - So you haven't technically defeated his suggestion.

[ctebah]

 

And what is this way? How do you convince countries not to pick sides in a conflict? If you have an interest there, you will get involved. I'm afraid you've offered no solution.

You don't go to war with Turkey or with Saudi Arabia or even Iran over their sponsorship of terrorism.  That would create exponentially more terrorists.  You apply sanctions, pull all military bases away from their countries and kick Turkey out of Nato.  Saudi Arabia, without US military bases, is basically defenseless.  The US also has the means to become an exporter of oil and that would further damage Saudi's financial ability.  

Not everything can be solved with conflict.  After the terrorists loose their funding and their supporting countries, finishing them would require very few boots on the ground.  Heck, they may just kill each other, they're already doing that.  

At least I didn't recommend the dumbest idea, to nuke them all...

[bluesman86]

 

They have been getting attacked by female pilot for a while now, and that didn't stop them.  A lot of those terrorists don't even care for religion, except to attract foreigners from other countries.  Clearly killing them in droves hasn't worked as now there are even more of them.  You have to attack the source first.  

You're suggesting we should nuke Iran?

[Gone]

 

You don't go to war with Turkey or with Saudi Arabia or even Iran over their sponsorship of terrorism.  That would create exponentially more terrorists.  You apply sanctions, pull all military bases away from their countries and kick Turkey out of Nato.  Saudi Arabia, without US military bases, is basically defenseless.  The US also has the means to become an exporter of oil and that would further damage Saudi's financial ability.  

Not everything can be solved with conflict.  After the terrorists loose their funding and their supporting countries, finishing them would require very few boots on the ground.  Heck, they may just kill each other, they're already doing that.  

At least I didn't recommend the dumbest idea, to nuke them all...

Sanctions don't and haven't worked.

 

Take a look at North Korea! Not everything can be solved by politics.

[ctebah]

Sanctions don't and haven't worked.

 

Take a look at North Korea! Not everything can be solved by politics.

North Korean people have been under sanction for generations.  Apply sanctions to Turkey or Saudi Arabia and see how quickly things change.  

 

OK - someone proposed a glass parking lot - you were one of the 2 who said that wont work - you said "brute force has never worked" then gave examples of boots on the ground.
I am not saying we destroy a part of the globe for the next thousand years - with untold fallout collateral damage - but you haven't been able to knock down that person's suggestion of a nuke.  There wouldnt be any little mosque-praying terrorists to avenge their parents. - So you haven't technically defeated his suggestion.

I clearly offered better solutions.  Any solution is better than using nukes.  Any.  

You're suggesting we should nuke Iran?

I don't see Iran supporting ISIS....

[compl3x]

 

You don't go to war with Turkey or with Saudi Arabia or even Iran over their sponsorship of terrorism.  That would create exponentially more terrorists.  You apply sanctions, pull all military bases away from their countries and kick Turkey out of Nato.  Saudi Arabia, without US military bases, is basically defenseless.  The US also has the means to become an exporter of oil and that would further damage Saudi's financial ability.  

Not everything can be solved with conflict.  After the terrorists loose their funding and their supporting countries, finishing them would require very few boots on the ground.  Heck, they may just kill each other, they're already doing that.  

At least I didn't recommend the dumbest idea, to nuke them all...

I wouldn't agree with nuking anyone, either, just to be clear.

Your suggestions aren't without merit, but some are extreme or would require more than unilateral decisions by one country. Additionally, Islamic State is having some success with funding itself through commandeered oil fields and other fundraising efforts; to some degree they are becoming more self-sufficient. I'll agree defeating an ideology can't just be a boots on the ground affair, but purely political strategy would also fail. Especially if you have a pressing issue like Yazidis being chased up the mountain side by a group who wants to rape, slaughter and enslave them. Sanction ain't going to help them.

[ctebah]

 

I wouldn't agree with nuking anyone, either, just to be clear.

Your suggestions aren't without merit, but some are extreme or would require more than unilateral decisions by one country. Additionally, Islamic State is having some success with funding itself through commandeered oil fields and other fundraising efforts; to some degree they are becoming more self-sufficient. I'll agree defeating an ideology can't just be a boots on the ground affair, but purely political strategy would also fail. Especially if you have a pressing issue like Yazidis being chased up the mountain side by a group who wants to rape, slaughter and enslave them. Sanction ain't going to help them.

No they're not and I agree.  But imagine if the West took all their bases from Saudi Arabia and applied sanctions.  They would become defenseless country and their people would demand change immediately.  Now do the same with Turkey.  It's a start.  You not only have to fight terrorists but you also have to fight those that sponsor them.  ISIS is selling a lot of it's oil in Iraq or even Turkey.  I believe they also go into Iran and sell to locals.  That would need to stop.

So far, for every country fighting terrorism, there is one supporting it... 

[Quillz]

I haven't read up on this, but is this an out come of agreeing to take in refugees? Did they take any?  Where some of them the ones doing this?

I don't know if the latter has been firmly established yet, but it's certainly a possibility. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

[compl3x]

 

No they're not and I agree.  But imagine if the West took all their bases from Saudi Arabia and applied sanctions.  They would become defenseless country and their people would demand change immediately.  Now do the same with Turkey.  It's a start.  You not only have to fight terrorists but you also have to fight those that sponsor them.  ISIS is selling a lot of it's oil in Iraq or even Turkey.  I believe they also go into Iran and sell to locals.  That would need to stop.

So far, for every country fighting terrorism, there is one supporting it... 

I don't know enough about the potential consequences of a defenseless SA so I can't say whether removing US military installations there would be good or bad. One obvious issue could be invasion by another ME country (Iran, perhaps?) which could be catastrophic for the region. Terrorism would get worse or become a trivial issue by comparison.

I don't know if the latter has been firmly established yet, but it's certainly a possibility. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

I doubt it. France and indeed much of Europe has had problems with radicals long before the current refugee crisis. We don't know who is responsible, but the obvious money is some fanatical Islamist jihadis linked to ISIS or a similar group.

[Morisato]

 

How are those refugee's coming along? Won't be surprised if Germany takes the next hit or UK for that matter. At least we know now France is committed into the war now. The 9/11 of France.

[compl3x]

One serious consequence of these attacks is that if fuels and invigorates all of those far-right, white supremacists. This is like free advertising for your local chapter of jack-booted thugs.

[WinMacLin Guy]

As a former immigrant from a middle eastern country, I would like to profusely apologize for the reprehensible actions of these horrible terrorists. The unjust death of one innocent person is unacceptable not to mention the death of more than 120 innocent people. My heart aches for the loved ones of those who were effected by these events.

As for the people who perpetrated or supported these attacks (not to mention other attacks around the world), they are the worst pieces of scum to exist on this planet. Not only are they murderous traitors to the nations that accepted them, but they give those of us who integrate into the Western societies that accepted us and allowed us to start new peaceful lives a bad image. No ideology or theology/religion should ever be put above people's right to life, right to security, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom to choose their own religion and indeed freedom to choose freedom from religion, right to equality regardless of gender, ethnicity, and/or sexual orientation; these terrorists and indeed all other extremists have no respect for the basic rights of man and so they have no respect from me. 

[123456789A]

As a former immigrant from a middle eastern country, I would like to profusely apologize for the reprehensible actions of these horrible terrorists. The unjust death of one innocent person is unacceptable not to mention the death of more than 120 innocent people. My heart aches for the loved ones of those who were effected by these events.

As for the people who perpetrated or supported these attacks (not to mention other attacks around the world), they are the worst pieces of scum to exist on this planet. Not only are they murderous traitors to the nations that accepted them, but they give those of us who integrate into the Western societies that accepted us and allowed us to start new peaceful lives a bad image. No ideology or theology/religion should ever be put above people's right to life, right to security, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom to choose their own religion and indeed freedom to choose freedom from religion, right to equality regardless of gender, ethnicity, and/or sexual orientation; these terrorists and indeed all other extremists have no respect for the basic rights of man and so they have no respect from me. 

I don't think you need to apologize. You just need to discard outdated religious belief systems if you haven't already, and integrate with Western society if that's where you choose to live. Sounds like you are on the right track.

[blerk]

I have no idea what the consequences will be or how to solve the problem of fundamentalist islam. 

My impression based on an incomplete knowledge is that talking won't solve anything - for every success such as Northern Ireland, there are many more examples such as Israel. 

Brute force won't work. The enemy is not an organised nation-state where the systematic destruction of the entire country (i.e. Japan or Germany) can be used to usher in a democratic system that promotes peace. 

I feel that integration into society won't work. These fundamentalists don't want to become productive members of society and want to impose their own utterly alien will, and those who become fundamentalists blame the current society for their troubles thereby justifying their fundamentalism. 

 I do think that this attack, amongst others is the beginning of a long closing of Europe's mindset towards the rest of the world. An overtly "liberal' (for a lack of a better word) mindset will be replaced by a more closed mindset due to the apparent failures failures of a very open society letting everyone in. I think that these sorts of events, along with the widespread dislike of an overbearing European bureaucracy will lead to the eventual failure of the pan-European system that will be replaced with something much narrower in scope. 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

What do you both propose then ?

Why ask a question when you know there isn't an appropriate answer.  You can try and prevent it at the strategic level but tactically, I can't see prevention.  In other words, I do not know nor do I claim to know.  However, any rational person with an IQ above a gnat should understand that killing of 300M isn't the answer.

I don't think you need to apologize. You just need to discard outdated religious belief systems if you haven't already, and integrate with Western society if that's where you choose to live. Sounds like you are on the right track.

Why?  Because you have a certain religious view doesn't mean you can not "integrate with Western society".  Actually, being fearful of practicing your religion is against "Western society" (assuming Canada is a mosh pit of religions like the US).   Mind you, I'm atheist but I also have no problem with people believing in their god or practicing their religion (as long as they don't force it on me).

[T3X4S]

As a former immigrant from a middle eastern country, I would like to profusely apologize for the reprehensible actions of these horrible terrorists. The unjust death of one innocent person is unacceptable not to mention the death of more than 120 innocent people. My heart aches for the loved ones of those who were effected by these events.

As for the people who perpetrated or supported these attacks (not to mention other attacks around the world), they are the worst pieces of scum to exist on this planet. Not only are they murderous traitors to the nations that accepted them, but they give those of us who integrate into the Western societies that accepted us and allowed us to start new peaceful lives a bad image. No ideology or theology/religion should ever be put above people's right to life, right to security, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom to choose their own religion and indeed freedom to choose freedom from religion, right to equality regardless of gender, ethnicity, and/or sexual orientation; these terrorists and indeed all other extremists have no respect for the basic rights of man and so they have no respect from me. 

No need to apologize for something you had no part of - but your sentiment is understood.  I live in Texas - think of all the apologizing I would have to do because of where i live !