Shooting/Terrorism in Paris

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Oregoropa said:
If I were NATO, the UN, interested parties, I would first work on creating a safe zone for refugees in coastal Northwestern Syria (currently controlled by the Assad regime). Work diplomatically to get a 30-50 square mile zone in this area. Use UN/NATO troops to safeguard the interior. It wouldn't border ISIS or rebel controlled areas.

From this staging point we can ship food medical supplies. Give the refugees everything they need to stay put and not risk their lives trying to get to Greece by sea.

Hopefully it will give Western Governments time to catch their collective breaths. Set up screening processes and make for a more orderly exit for those suffering.
Click to expand...


The US already has an intense screening process. They go through a minimum of 10 government agencies. If one would take the time to turn Hannity or Rush off for 10 min and read a real article and not all of this bullshit I see vomited on Facebook they would know this.

It's propaganda, fear, and xenophobia; plain and simple.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
BVS said:
The US already has an intense screening process. They go through a minimum of 10 government agencies. If one would take the time to turn Hannity or Rush off for 10 min and read a real article and not all of this bullshit I see vomited on Facebook they would know this.

It's propaganda, fear, and xenophobia; plain and simple.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Click to expand...

I've gotten to the point where I usually just ignore you. Everybody knows your game. My post was a legitimate idea not just for the sake of the US, France, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, Austria, Germany but most importantly the refugees themselves. For you its "Oh look, Oregoropa, posted something, let me shit on it, without taking the time to read it and understand the context"
 
BEAL said:
AQ was a bit more political in their demands. Still rooted in Islam
Click to expand...

Ouch.

Even though Al Qaeda might have seemed like the Mickey Mouse version of what ISIS is pulling off today, saying they were "still rooted in Islam" is just wrong. Political or not, nowhere in Islam does it say "hijack a plane and fly into a tower to destroy innocent lives"...

Al Qaeda seem like old news but I think no one should make the mistake to picture them as more reasonable or rational. They are/were also just a terroristic organisation who have very little to do with Islam or any other worldly religion for that matter.
 
Oregoropa said:
I've gotten to the point where I usually just ignore you. Everybody knows your game. My post was a legitimate idea not just for the sake of the US, France, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, Austria, Germany but most importantly the refugees themselves. For you its "Oh look, Oregoropa, posted something, let me shit on it, without taking the time to read it and understand the context"
Click to expand...


Sorry, my tone was a little harsh. It wasn't aimed towards you, but the right in general. The Breitbart and other bs I see being posted on FB makes my skin crawl.

That being said, I don't think a 50 square foot easy target is a viable solution.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Irvine511 said:
the problem, though, with destroying ISIS is that death inspires more recruits. the West could carpet bomb for weeks, all those assholes could be vaporized, and some kid living in a Brussels suburb sees it on TV and straps a bomb to his chest, runs into Gare de Nord, and derails a train heading to Lille.

i realize that's not helpful, and a criticism without a solution. i have no solution. i just think that there's no "wipe them out, all of them." what we're dealing with here are the children of Bin Laden, young men with no jobs and no sex and no future who grew up in the aftermath of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. how do we stamp that out? that which drives angry young men to extremist utopian visions of life?

it's so depressing.
Click to expand...

Diemen said:
The thing is, while Daesh* might be a slightly new flavor of terrorist extremism, just bombing the hell out of them and wiping them off the face of the planet is not going to address the fundamental problem, and will, in fact, guarantee the rise of the next branch. There have been interviews done with some of the Daesh fighters, and many of them are NOT actually devout Muslims with a strong fundamental understanding of their faith. They're disillusioned youth who were treated badly under US-backed Al-Maliki in Iraq, and youth who are especially vulnerable to fall under the spell of people who give them a sense of (violent, retributive) purpose and the veneer of being sanctioned by God.

We're not going to end this kind of extreme terrorism until we start doing something real about the "hearts and minds" of every day people in these middle Eastern countries. We simply can't expect a military approach to work unless it is paired with a humanitarian approach that is just as strong if not more so. It's easy as shit to bomb bad guys. It's a lot more difficult to give people hope and access to things that improve their lives in a meaningful way. But that's the only way we stand a chance of eradicating this Islamist extremism. Until that gets addressed it's just going to be whack-a-mole.

*The assholes formely known as ISIS
Click to expand...

a million times yes to these posts.

imo fundamentalism like this is part of the human condition. you can bomb the shit out of Da'ish strongholds in the middle East if you want. but you destroy Da'ish (and kill who knows how many innocent civilians) and another insane terrorist group will rise up and take its place.

Watched this this morning. Harrowing stuff. Towards the end a shy 6yo kid beams as he proudly declares he wants to be a suicide bomber when he grows up. It points to what Irvine is talking about, no-hopers growing up knowing only war. They are also anti-Da'ish.



What fucking bomb is going to stop this?
 
BVS said:
Sorry, my tone was a little harsh. It wasn't aimed towards you, but the right in general. The Breitbart and other bs I see being posted on FB makes my skin crawl.

That being said, I don't think a 50 square foot easy target is a viable solution.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Click to expand...

Ok buddy. I accept your apology
 
Further to Diemen's point about a solution that might actually work... Arab Spring activist Iyad El-Baghdadi says the same thing - people won't like those solutions because they aren't "sexy" or quick.

[TWEET]666158107584798720[/TWEET]
 
what solutions are they suggesting cobl?

Hollande doesn't really have much choice right now - if he doesn't go after them, he will be seen as weak at home (already is seen as weak and ineffectual), so he has to act decisively as a strong leader, especially with Le Pen baying for blood - regional elections here soon, so really tricky timing politics-wise... and France cannot afford to give any more ground to the FN as if they were to get into power, then we surely would get the civil war IS are supposedly looking for...

not sure we're looking at a solution as such, possibly more the lesser of two evils...
 
Last edited:
Oh I'm not really sure, I don't really know enough. Just saying that Headache's line of thinking doesn't hit the mark. Bombing is a sexy solution and we're attracted to it for its taboo thrill of violence, but will it really work?
 
CUDBAdBUcAE1IpU.jpg
 
Mack_Again said:
Is ISIS really the Islam fundamentalism or just "everything should be fucking destroyed" -ism?
Click to expand...

Considering what ISIS believes in to not be Islam, because we don't want to be insulting to other Muslims is exactly why we've butchered our response to them in every which way.

It is Islam. In the same way that Hasid's are Jews (without the beheading and all), or why Evangelical Christians believe that God invented the world in literally 7 days and the Flintstones was a documentary.

Just because the majority of rational thinking people that practice the same religions don't agree doesn't make them any less religious. They are deeply religious and true to their beliefs.

That's what is so frightening about them. They are driven by what they believe in. They've gone to great lengths to capture cities that have otherwise zero strategic value only because of their importance in what they believe is the coming of the end times.


When I say they need to be destroyed, I don't mean just carpet bomb them into rubble. I mean a global coalition the likes we haven't seen maybe ever. NATO, Russian, Arab forces all fighting together... while at the same time continuing larger "hearts and minds" type missions throughout the rest of the Muslim world... starting with education.

Will wiping ISIS out be the end of the global fight against terrorism? Of course not. But they need to be destroyed. Then we can go back to strategic attacks, intelligence gathering to stop further attacks, and most importantly, working to change the "hearts and minds."

But these fuckers are different. They must be dealt with. And now.
 
mirrorballman said:
Ouch.



Even though Al Qaeda might have seemed like the Mickey Mouse version of what ISIS is pulling off today, saying they were "still rooted in Islam" is just wrong. Political or not, nowhere in Islam does it say "hijack a plane and fly into a tower to destroy innocent lives"...



Al Qaeda seem like old news but I think no one should make the mistake to picture them as more reasonable or rational. They are/were also just a terroristic organisation who have very little to do with Islam or any other worldly religion for that matter.
Click to expand...



I wasn't saying AQ was a Micky Mouse version, I was just saying they weren't as hardline death cultish as ISIS. Osama had the worlds largest porn collection, I mean...come on. They were more your standard terrorist group in that they wanted more than just destruction.

And of course there's no passage about flying a plane into a building. How could there be? But, there are passages in the Koran/Hadith about killing infidels. How they do it really doesn't matter.

I guess ISIS really isn't true Islam because they'd attack us with swords and rocks these guns are technically innovation from the time of the prophet and therefore that makes them enemies of Islam too....

We need to entire world to buck up and squash this threat together. Doesn't matter if you're Russian, Chinese, or Saudi....we are all targets to these people.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
YBORCITY said:
but the bombing is the one biggest recruitment tool they have... no way! I respectfully disagree. These guys need to be annihilated end of story - most Muslims hate this group and it actually might help our reputation in the areaif we rid the earth of this scum.
Click to expand...

Uh... how about responding to points 1, 2, 4 and 5 instead of ignoring them completely and hoping that bombing the shit out of them fixes it?

Bombing inevitably creates collateral damage. Innocent people die, leaving their loved ones to stew in the knowledge that western powers, no matter how noble their stated goals and no matter how much these innocent people disliked Daesh, killed their daughter/son/brother/sister/wife/husband/etc. If we just drop some bombs and then get the hell out of dodge, we create a vacuum for the next power-hungry assholes to come in and exploit the victims of our inevitable collateral damage.

Which is why I said in my original comment that if there is a military option their needs to be an immediate and vigorous humanitarian follow up, or we just perpetuate the whack-a-mole scenario we've found ourselves in.
 
I don't think any nation has expressed a willingness to commit to ground troops to take on ISIS - bombing alone will not be effective.
 
I have heard that they're destroying many of mosques and things, thou. and some of them don't even mention God (well that kind of account may not be that credible, but). I don't know what they're really trying to achieve except for just destroying things for very immature reasons with very smudge of religion.
 
ntalwar said:
Some of them may be. A few of the ones from Belgium seem to have more of a criminal/nonreligious element. One attacker was a bar owner whose bar was recently shut down because of drug dealing on the premises.
Click to expand...


I'm not disagreeing, but don't you think their "criminal" behavior is sort of part of what they're doing? Killing isn't okay in Islam. Except for (in this archaic interpretation that ISIS uses) killing people who oppose Islam.

Dealing drugs I'm sure is also in some facet against Islam. But I'm sure all they do is justify it by some clause with some crazy lunatic interpretation saying "it's okay to sin if it means I'm supporting the mujaheddin." And thus, they can still be deeply religious, and typical criminals dealing drugs.
 
police raids in Saint Denis, Paris (near the Stade de France) in the night

3 police officers slightly wounded
2 terrorists killed including a woman wearing a suicide vest
at least 1 terrorist still holed up
3 arrested
schools, colleges, businesses closed
public transport to St Denis suspended


Paris attacks: suspects and 'mastermind' Abdel-Hamid Abu Oud holed up in Saint-Denis raid – live | World news | The Guardian

St Denis raid: what we know so far

The police operation in St-Denis is ongoing, but here is what we currently know:

Heavy shooting, including automatic gunfire, and explosions have been reported in St Denis, a northern Paris suburb. St Denis is where the Stade de France, one of the targets of Friday’s attacks, is located, although the current operation is in the centre of the suburb, close to the basilica.
The targets of the raid are the mastermind of the Paris attacks, Abdel-Hamid Abu Oud; as well as Salah Abdeslam and another suspect thought to be a ninth attacker.
Two or three men are reported to have barricaded themselves in an apartment, exchanging gunfire with officers. It is not confirmed that these men are the suspects named above.
Shooting began at 4.30am local time (0330 GMT) and has continued in bursts in the hours since.
At least one police officer has been injured in the operation.
Roads have been closed off and the police operation is ongoing, with large numbers of police officers and police vehicles in the area. Military reinforcements have also arrived.
Residents have been told to stay in their homes and away from windows. Some have been moved to a temporary shelter in the town hall. Transport to St-Denis has been suspended and schools will not open on Wednesday.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Diemen said:
Uh... how about responding to points 1, 2, 4 and 5 instead of ignoring them completely and hoping that bombing the shit out of them fixes it?

Bombing inevitably creates collateral damage. Innocent people die, leaving their loved ones to stew in the knowledge that western powers, no matter how noble their stated goals and no matter how much these innocent people disliked Daesh, killed their daughter/son/brother/sister/wife/husband/etc. If we just drop some bombs and then get the hell out of dodge, we create a vacuum for the next power-hungry assholes to come in and exploit the victims of our inevitable collateral damage.

Which is why I said in my original comment that if there is a military option their needs to be an immediate and vigorous humanitarian follow up, or we just perpetuate the whack-a-mole scenario we've found ourselves in.
Click to expand...

UHHHH <---see what I did there?

I never said to not do the humanitarian part after the bombing but to allow this group to keep on doing this with impunity is not right. To me it sounds like your more worried about the collateral damage/innocents of the da'esh region than the innocents that went out on a Friday night for dinner, concert maybe a soccer match. These animals are are atrgeting the very way of life that we hold most dear.... it's been 25 years of trying to understand them and prop them up but at some point we have to draw a line and I think it's right here right now. (doing that UHHH thing really didn't make me feel any better).
 
YBORCITY said:
UHHHH <---see what I did there?



I never said to not do the humanitarian part after the bombing but to allow this group to keep on doing this with impunity is not right. To me it sounds like your more worried about the collateral damage/innocents of the da'esh region than the innocents that went out on a Friday night for dinner, concert maybe a soccer match. These animals are are atrgeting the very way of life that we hold most dear.... it's been 25 years of trying to understand them and prop them up but at some point we have to draw a line and I think it's right here right now. (doing that UHHH thing really didn't make me feel any better).
Click to expand...


How did anything he said amount to caring about one innocent over another? You're not making sense. According to your logic; revenge bombing will somehow show worry about those innocents that went to a concert even if you take out more innocents. So then who will revenge those innocents? Basically you're just wanting to match their barbarianism.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
YBORCITY said:
To me it sounds like your more worried about the collateral damage/innocents of the da'esh region than the innocents that went out on a Friday night for dinner, concert maybe a soccer match.
Click to expand...


Again you miss the point. Just so we're clear, I'm worried about all innocent life, whether it's people like you and me or poor Arab families in Iraq and Syria.

Advocating for a more cautious approach that places a high priority on humanitarian efforts that attempt to address the root causes behind the success of Islamist extremism's recruitment efforts will save more western lives than your preferred scorch the earth/bomb them to hell approach.

Responding to terrorist acts like this with a scorch the earth approach is exactly what the terrorists want us to do.
 
I think you and BVS are correct-I don't think I'm getting my point across right.... it's my belief that we have been over-cautious and extremely cerebral about our approach to this but in my mind it hasn't worked, they are still bombing and taking out innocent lives. The invasion of Iraq was a massive blunder and I feel we kinda bombed first without thinking of any exit strategies or realized what a huge vacuum and destabilizing force the invasion would cause. With that said, ISIS is a bit different than AQ in the way they pull these things off with seeming impunity. While agreeing with you with the trying better to understand the root-cause of all of this fundamentalism these guys should be punished and not with carpet bombing but with strategic targets and possibly hitting them monetarily and sanctions and the like.
 
Diemen said:
Bombing inevitably creates collateral damage. Innocent people die, leaving their loved ones to stew in the knowledge that western powers, no matter how noble their stated goals and no matter how much these innocent people disliked Daesh, killed their daughter/son/brother/sister/wife/husband/etc. If we just drop some bombs and then get the hell out of dodge, we create a vacuum for the next power-hungry assholes to come in and exploit the victims of our inevitable collateral damage.
Click to expand...

Sticking my idealistic nose in for a moment to say I totally agree with you. What it boils down to is this, in the words of Michael Franti: " You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it in to peace." So true. We have to be more than a war machine, we have to change the thinking and shift the paradigm of those sad sick souls preoccupied with death and destruction. So the biggest question of all is how the hell do we do that? I don't have any answers. It will take decades to change the thinking of the children.
But I will say this, I love the measured response by President Obama. It's refreshing to have a president who actually is hesitant put more boots on the ground and send more of our kids there to die in the name of "doing something" and revenge.
 
YBORCITY said:
I think you and BVS are correct-I don't think I'm getting my point across right.... it's my belief that we have been over-cautious and extremely cerebral about our approach to this but in my mind it hasn't worked, they are still bombing and taking out innocent lives. The invasion of Iraq was a massive blunder and I feel we kinda bombed first without thinking of any exit strategies or realized what a huge vacuum and destabilizing force the invasion would cause. With that said, ISIS is a bit different than AQ in the way they pull these things off with seeming impunity. While agreeing with you with the trying better to understand the root-cause of all of this fundamentalism these guys should be punished and not with carpet bombing but with strategic targets and possibly hitting them monetarily and sanctions and the like.
Click to expand...
No, we understand that. You are getting your point across. Your point just seems extremely reactionary and not all that well thought out.

As was said before: we are in a no-win situation. They have a major persecution complex (as do pretty much all religious fanatics). They believe we need to be destroyed because we are threatening their way of life, and us attacking them is proof. It IS a recruitment tool, no matter what anyone tries to tell you to the contrary. It's the sort of thing that keeps something like ISIS going. If we don't bomb them, they'll continue. If we do bomb them, they'll continue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
lharper
Innocent Experience - Chapter 6
Replies
3
Views
1K
lharper
lharper
N
All That You Can't Leave Behind/Beautiful Day 15th Anniversary Thread
Replies
21
Views
4K
Mrs. Garrison
Mrs. Garrison
Pearl
Topless Ukrainian Feminists to Protest Euro 2012
Replies
14
Views
2K
Pearl
Pearl
financeguy
Geert Wilder's speech in Berlin
Replies
6
Views
955
cobl04
cobl04

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom