Paris Attacks

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]pat wrote:
First, even though the extremist content in Islam is seemingly excessively large, we still have to let cooler heads prevail and not condemn 1.2 billion (give or take) people as innately fucked in the head.

The second, is that given the extremely large contingent of extremists in Islam and the very pithy effort of the majority of muslims to counter, squash, or otherwise try to contain their extremist problem, they do all share varying degrees of blame. They need to clean their own house, and too few have tried. It’s difficult to do anything about it, if they won’t take care of it themselves. All we can do is fight and kill terrorists, we cannot ‘fix’ their extremist problem. Only they can do that, and to that end, they have thus far failed.[/quote]

Not only have they failed, theyve given a shit effort, and the rest of the world is justified in being pissed. At some point they need to get on board and deal with this, or go down with the savages.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ← 1/4 of the world population can not be evil, but they sure as hell are apathetic.

122

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
3. I think it’s OK to take in refugees because the majority of them will be running from just those circumstances. The idea of ISIS smuggling an army into Europe is a bit too far into tinfoil hat territory for me. People can be assholes, but the law of averages dictates that extremists are a small percentage. Most refugees are scared shitless citizens. Also, what the fuck else are you gonna do? “Sorry folks, some brown people turned out to be killers so no more of those”? What about the fact that some of the Paris assassins were French citizens? You will never have total security unless you have total control over the populace and who here wants this to happen?
[/quote]

I agree, if the goal is to save as many lives as possible then accepting refugees is the best course of action even if some of them are the enemy. It’s much harder for them to kill people in Europe than Syria, the casualty counts show this.[/quote]

The goal of states should be to provide for the security and well being of their citizens. The value of Syrians lives vis a vis American ones from the point of view of the American government should be that American lives are worth more by virtue of their citizenship. [/quote]

That’s one opinion but many would disagree with you. You are probably right about Americans but what about all the European states? They don’t always share our views on this. Most on this thread do not agree on your view that some lives are worth more than others.

123

[quote]Bismark wrote:

The goal of states should be to provide for the security and well being of their citizens. The value of Syrians lives vis a vis American ones from the point of view of the American government should be that American lives are worth more by virtue of their citizenship. [/quote]

Exactly.

125

[quote]doogie wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

The goal of states should be to provide for the security and well being of their citizens. The value of Syrians lives vis a vis American ones from the point of view of the American government should be that American lives are worth more by virtue of their citizenship. [/quote]

Exactly.[/quote]

x2
It’s not that I don’t care about other people, but that I care about the ones I know and love a lot more than I do someone that is a stranger.

126

[quote]Bismark wrote:

P.S., I did find your links to be informative and thought provoking. Who is depicted in your avatar? Looks familiar though I can’t recall where I’ve seen the image.[/quote]

He is the otac Hrvatske domovine, am I right loppar? I spent a few months there once. Is it your homeland?

127

There’s something else at play here. Let’s assume that this was in fact ISIS (a reasonable assumption, I guess). I highly recommend Jessica Stern’s book on the organisation; in it, you’ll learn one thing first and foremost:

ISIS are a media production company.

Sure, that’s not the only thing they are, but it is an important part of their strategy. If they orchestrate an attack on European soil, carried out by, among others, French citizens and people who took the refugee route (a claim I’d still like to see confirmed beyond doubt but of course it is possible) - what is the message?

The message is that they can strike whereever they want. It is also that there may be wolves among the sheep Europe is currently taking in, further heating the refugee debate and shaking the political landscape. Those are just two that come to mind. I despise what they did but you can’t say they’re stupid.

128

[quote]Bismark wrote:

Though that line of reasoning, one could conclude that George W. Bush was “directly responsible” for the September 11th attacks, which is of course preposterous. Intelligence services are not omniscient and hind sight is 20/20. If refugee status under international law is limited to non-military age males, what is to stop that restriction from expanding to Islam outright?
[/quote]

No. Let me explain this in more detail. During the Grexit negotiations earlier this year, the foreign minister of Greece explicitly threatened other EU states that unless lenient terms are given to Greece, they will let thousands of extremists through. It seems that the Greeks are doing just that, as they are not even trying to police external borders of the EU. Interestingly, the flood of migrants stop for a couple of days when the Greek shipping companies were on strike (!).

Germany unilaterally suspended the Dublin accords and virtually promised asylum to any Syrian that manages to reach Germany. Sweden was even a worse offender, directly guaranteeing asylum to Syrians reaching Swedish soil.

So, all international treaties were simply trampled with the idiotic “Come here” pronouncement by Merkel and co. State borders, passports and identity checks? This is more akin to a horde.

There is also the “first EU entry country” caveat. Dublin accords explicitly state that rejected asylum seekers will be deported to the first EU country they entered where they technically should have applied for asylum in the first place - which means that no one wants to register them in the EU joint Eurodoc database, lest they end up with 300k+ of illiterate Afghans and Eritreans if Germany ever comes to their senses.

With 7-10k refugees passing through the Balkan route DAILY, and holding times under 8 hours, you’re lucky if you even record the false name and birthdate the migrants offhandedly give (Slovenian police reported that around a third of refugees claimed were born on 1/1/1990). So much for intelligence gathering and vetting. Not to mentioned that Syrian passports and diplomas cost a few hundred dollars a piece.

Perversely, this “capture the flag” mentality means that the biggest losers are actual refugees in camps in Lebanon and Turkey, who cannot afford substantial sums needed to travel to the EU. Sweden is drastically reducing it’s foreign aid budget earmarked for them in order to house and feed migrants on Swedish soil.

So Merkel fucked up, is COMPLETELY paralyzed and overwhelmed and now wants the “backward, xenophobic” Eastern Europeans to shoulder the burden, the same countries that were warning her against this exact course of action.

So despite all the legalese speak, the only one clearly breaching the EU agreements and respective national laws were Greece and Germany, the irony being that only Hungary judiciously tried to implement the Dublin accords, with the expected media fallout.

I was on the fence regarding the whole “refugees” thing until I saw them up close. Especially groups of disciplined, well fed, fit young men siting in silence and menacingly gazing everyone around them.

129

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

P.S., I did find your links to be informative and thought provoking. Who is depicted in your avatar? Looks familiar though I can’t recall where I’ve seen the image.[/quote]

He is the otac Hrvatske domovine, am I right loppar? I spent a few months there once. Is it your homeland?[/quote]

Yes on both counts.

130

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Given the national tragedy that France, our oldest ally, has suffered today, political quips are wholly tasteless. As president Obama stated, “This is an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share.” Show a modicum of respect for those affected.[/quote]
Absolute Bullshit. The problem is that Humanity DOES NOT share any universal values. The vast majority of the Islamic World has no concept of any western common law values or freedom of religion or of property rights or of secular courts or of Empiricism and the scientific method for that matter.
Roughly 1 Billion Muslims are fundamentally culturally incompatible with Western culture and legal systems and half of them are culturally incompatible with the other half.

There is nothing xenophobic about rejecting the importation of people fundamentally incompatible with your own native culture and legal system. The West has gone through hundreds of years of bloodshed and sacrifice to get to where it is now and unfortunately the only thing that we can do is leave the middle east to it’s own devices to do the same. In other words, closed borders to the region and winding down military intervention as well.

131

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]nighthawkz wrote:
3. I think it’s OK to take in refugees because the majority of them will be running from just those circumstances. The idea of ISIS smuggling an army into Europe is a bit too far into tinfoil hat territory for me. People can be assholes, but the law of averages dictates that extremists are a small percentage. Most refugees are scared shitless citizens. Also, what the fuck else are you gonna do? “Sorry folks, some brown people turned out to be killers so no more of those”? What about the fact that some of the Paris assassins were French citizens? You will never have total security unless you have total control over the populace and who here wants this to happen?
[/quote]

I agree, if the goal is to save as many lives as possible then accepting refugees is the best course of action even if some of them are the enemy. It’s much harder for them to kill people in Europe than Syria, the casualty counts show this.[/quote]

‘‘Save their lives’’. That’s far fetched. Implying the refugees are 100% direct impending victimes and not just people who want to go away from where they live to profit somewhere else.

132

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Given the national tragedy that France, our oldest ally, has suffered today, political quips are wholly tasteless. As president Obama stated, “This is an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share.” Show a modicum of respect for those affected.[/quote]

I don’t think political quips are necessarily tasteless in this case but I do appreciate your sentiment.

I do not appreciate the Obama quote. It was not an attack on humanity it was an attack by Muslims on the Western way of life. This is very important to understand and not doing so, understanding and acknowledging, it is impossible to properly deal with the problem.

It doesn’t matter if it was ISIS or Al Qaeda or someone else, THEY WERE MUSLIMS. The Muslim religion is a religion of hate. This attack was small fries, just wait until they get nukes. They won’t hesitate to use them.

The current course the Muslim people are on and the current course the western world is on, as far as dealing with the Muslims, leads to the inescapable conclusion that we can say good bye to Israel, New York City, Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle. This will happen in less than 100 years. I’ve probably got 30-40 years left. I hope I don’t see this happen but I’m not optimistic.

Our only hope is the Muslims keep up enough of these small fry attacks that the rest of the world wakes up to the severity of the threat and actually does something about it. Otherwise, like I said, it’s only a matter of time. Could be in just ten to fifteen years. Anyone who doesn’t know this is just living in denial.

[/quote]

Setting aside the hysterics, what exactly are you proposing?[/quote]

The only thing I can think of that might work is a united world in a multi generational effort to force Muslims to remove the hate from the Koran and all their teachings until it has been forgotten. That’s never going to happen so we’re fucked.[/quote]

I understand the emotional content of what you are saying. I get it. If there are this many bad apples, maybe we should start looking at the tree.

I have 2 feelings on the matter. First, even though the extremist content in Islam is seemingly excessively large, we still have to let cooler heads prevail and not condemn 1.2 billion (give or take) people as innately fucked in the head.

The second, is that given the extremely large contingent of extremists in Islam and the very pithy effort of the majority of muslims to counter, squash, or otherwise try to contain their extremist problem, they do all share varying degrees of blame. They need to clean their own house, and too few have tried. It’s difficult to do anything about it, if they won’t take care of it themselves. All we can do is fight and kill terrorists, we cannot ‘fix’ their extremist problem. Only they can do that, and to that end, they have thus far failed.[/quote]

Excellent post.

133

[quote]TooHuman wrote:
unfortunately the only thing that we can do is leave the middle east to it’s own devices to do the same. In other words, closed borders to the region and winding down military intervention as well.[/quote]

A wise prescription. Good thing the region isn’t strategically vital to the United States.

134

Paris was
wait for it
our fault! (Or at least we are morally equivalent.)

What an asshole.

135

1024×1140 139 KB

Let ISIL and other international terrorist organizations have free reign in the region. We can concede them a base of operations. That definitely won’t come back to bite the United States and its allies in the ass.

136

Baby steps


137

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
Paris was
wait for it
our fault! (Or at least we are morally equivalent.)

What an asshole.

[/quote]

This was one of the top comments on that article:

"Bhokara 2 hours ago
I’ve been a Liberal Democrat all my life. I campaigned for Bobby Kennedy before he was shot. And frankly this kind of Kumbaya crap is what gives Progressives a bad name. Buddhists, Jews, Sikhs, Wiccans, Christians, Hindus, Parsees, Jains and Confucians do not ban girls from going to school, have an automatic death sentence for leaving their faiths, stone Gays to death, embrace Honor Killings of women who refuse to be sold into slavery, blow up airliners, deny women the right even to drive a car and force them to wear circus tents when they leave home, and carry out mass murder like yesterday’s attacks in Paris. Muslims do these things. It is LONG past time for the Left to stop pretending that a cult of medieval barbarism is a modern faith of tolerance, peace and gender equality.

138

405×522 110 KB

[quote]TooHuman wrote:
unfortunately the only thing that we can do is leave the middle east to it’s own devices to do the same.[/quote]

Yeah, what the international system needs now is a Middle Eastern version of the Thirty Years War. Only eleven and a half million people died as a direct result of that. I’m sure it will be a lot less with modern armaments.

139

One of the suicide bombers tried to make it into the stadium. I believe French president Hollande was there.

140

One of the terrorist was a “refugee” a few weeks ago.