Terrorist attack in Paris

[Removed by Support] Stay strong Paris

thanx for the topic ,I m french , it's good to see poeple with this 14 november , very thanx you , good game people

I'm with you all.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

Getting the fuck out only works if we are sure the problems are self contained and they'll solve by themselves.

The current situation doesn't look like that. I dislike war as any other sane person out there, but the problem is too big to ignore now. This is more like the nazis.

More troubling that war is not thinking the afterwards. Iraq is the poster child for ill conceived militar efforts. Libya seems like the same (although the fact that peaceful civilians were killed makes things harder to judge).

If we are talking about Syria and not middle east in general, then backing Assad is definetely the better solution. Syria was fine under Assad. Not perfect, but fine. Much better than it would be under the fundamentalists. Same with Iran. The people were much better with Khomeini. The people would have found their solution. Now the west with it's actions pushed them 200 hundred years back.

And no, the situation is nothing like the Nazis. Not even close. The krauts started an expansive war that resulted in the death of possibly over 70 million people. My country alone lost about 10% of it's population, and it wasn't even the worst victim.

BTW rjt197197 has called scum desperate people who have not done anything, were forced to leave their home and are being drowned, beaten, hunted everyday. I reported him and nothing happened. Seems like the mods here, who usually edit a post that calls someboy an idiot, have a weird idea of what is hate speech and what is not.

That ignores that Assad attacked their own people (so he is not viable anymore, even if he returns to power), and that totalitarian governments are a nice place for things like ISIS to born from resentment.

What rjt197197 said is ambiguous. Did he refer to muslims in general? Or just to terrorists? I wouldn't jump to conclussions.
...

Beyond all this things...poor people. I wish this could be solved somehow...My condolences.

"

Syria was fine under Assad. Not perfect, but fine. Much better than it would be under the fundamentalists.

Well it would have been better for the West in Libya as well and we all know how Libya turned out. Afghanistan in the 70s war far more devoloped in human rights than it became after the war.

There isn't a single Muslim country where Democracy fully works.

"

That ignores that Assad attacked their own people (so he is not viable anymore, even if he returns to power), and that totalitarian governments are a nice place for things like ISIS to born from resentment.

ISIS orientates from Iraq.
Small terrorist groups always existed.
Assad only made people disappear like Ghaddafi but he didn't persecute minorities(being one himself)
He started bombing civilian areas after the rebellion started.
You can't expect any leader in the world not defend himself against a rebellion or try to get a replacement with the same political ideologies.

"

I reported him and nothing happened. Seems like the mods here, who usually edit a post that calls someboy an idiot, have a weird idea of what is hate speech and what is not.

The kiwis only adapt the political correct sickness from the USA. Verbally attacking refugees is cosidered freedom of speech. Look at facebook. Germany has sued facebook for breaking the law for not removing radical speech. Facebook literally left postings unedited like extremists wanting to put Muslims into concentration camps and other illegal hate speech. The perpetrators have been arrested in many cases.


NZ is so small that they will never have the problems of right/left wing propaganda against minorities becoming attractive.

"

Did he refer to muslims in general? Or just to terrorists? I wouldn't jump to conclussions.

He is refering to refugees from Syria and Iraq.
This is right wing extremist propaganda. "The refugees are terrorists, they bring bacteria, they steal and so on"

In Germany a dirty nationalist party is on 6% in polls atm ranging up to 10% in some areas.
In countries like France, it's even possible France National(yeah they are on the same level as Hitler) will win a presidential election.

It only takes 1 national lunatic to win a vote and it will be the same situation as in 1933.

"

Bars wrote:

"

TheWretch wrote:

[Removed by Support] Stay strong Paris

[Removed by Support]

Stay Strong Paris.

[Removed by Support]

"

Bars wrote:

"

"the key players would be the US, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and Iran"

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the US are directly or indirectly funding and helping ISIS.

"

None of this had to happen, but U.S. officials who thought their "superior intellects" and "good intentions" meant they had the right to violently manipulate other governments not only made this possible, but nearly inevitable.

I don't think "good intentions", even misguided ones, were ever a part of the equation.

Currently funding -no. Funding and providing weaponry prior to them formally becoming ISIS, yes.

The good intentions were to overthrow despotic regimes and the wishful thinking was that the people would somehow magically form working democracies.

"

Hilbert wrote:

There are more than enough targets which would result in far more deaths than Paris.

A target of opportunity is not the target with the highest yield, but one that is easier to go after.

"

Hilbert wrote:

You don't get how terrorist networks work.
The one paying them are rich Saudi-Arabians, Yemenians and other countries.

Now guess which arms exporter sells them tanks and other arms?

Russia nope
USA nope
France nope
China nope
UK nope
Oh right Germany.

Their sponsors have no interest that they attack their business partners.

The targets are mainly those who openly opposing them.

Assuming that terrorist groups act logically is a fundamentally flawed perspective. You might be able to make rough assumptions for a given group based on past behavior, but the dissent and power struggles from internal factions will always cause significant unpredictability. The cult of personality in a given faction may determine that groups actions as much as their stated ideologies.

Yemen is not a major source of funding for anyone. Yemen provides training grounds and some people. Perhaps you meant Qatar?

"

Hilbert wrote:

You are such a Republicanian

I could easily say that you are such a communist, libertarian, pacifist, Quaker etc with as much lack of proof, so please leave personal attacks out of this.

Critique of the person responsible for an action, does not mean the person criticizing them is of an opposing political party. The investigation did not start with the emails, it was the investigation into some very skewed foreign policies that led to the emails. Had the emails been kept on government servers, the questions on what potential criminal activities were authorized by the current government would never have any supporting facts to prosecute on. Governments can and do take illegal and extralegal actions that are not criminal, but there are processes that must be adhered to. What the emails will show is that these processes were not followed and that the destabilizing actions were rogue. If you have ever browsed the redacted declassified documents section (if you have access to such), you will understand what a torturous process this will be.

"

Hilbert wrote:

The ones at fault for those conflicts are Jimmy Carter, Bush Senior and Bush Junior. You could blame the Obama Administration for Libya.

Jimmy Carter and Trialteralism helped stabilize the region. The two Bush administrations certainly provided emotional ammunition for disgruntled terrorists, but more importantly, they cut into the terrorists ability to conduct their attacks.

Part of the problem goes back further to the US training Afghani fighters ro withstand Soviet aggression.

None of those made ISIS possible. Large weapon shipments enabled revolutions that left a power vacuum without any solution in place for a stable replacement. Abandoning a fledgling Iraq also left a large hole.

This isn't about which party was in office, or blaming officials of a given party. It is about the hubris of inexperienced people making bad decisions with long reaching consequences.

The facts and history will bear out what I am saying.

"

Hilbert wrote:

China doesn't care about ISIS they care more about Japan, Hong-Kong, Taiwan and the 4 asian tigers and the tiger cup economy states.

This statement is erroneous, to put it mildly. China intends to become the third superpower in the world. Any serious study of Chinese history and politics would make this clear. What happens in the Middle East is of extreme importance to China. Oil aside, China has shipped over 4 Trillon in arms to Iran and Syria over the last 35 years. That's is 115 Billion reasons annually for China to stay interested in the region.


Using the logic you posted earlier, China not only didn't supply ISIS, but did supply their chief antagonist Assad, including supplying the chlorine gas (manufactured at Norinco) used in the April 2014 attack on Kafr Zita. China should have been a much bigger priority for ISIS. The reason it wasn't and isn't is that the Chinese have a much tighter control over what happens in their country. IE - it is not a target of opportunity.

Please note that I am not saying that being skeptical of my post being politicized is bad. Skeptcism is healthy, and I believe that on issues of grave importance, such skepticism must be aimed at all sources if information, including the ones that you normally agree with.

I'm not going to bother responding or debating points on this. My intention is not to prove my viewpoint here, or invalidate other people's viewpoints. I would be happy if just a few more people opened their eyes and ears and paid attention to foreign policy, at least long enough to know whether their leaders were on the right path.

Just because it doesn't effect us personally each day, doesn't mean that this sort of thing doesn't matter. It can be dealt with, and the violence minimized, if we make sure our leaders understand that sticking their heads in the sand is not something the voters will allow.

Doing any less is disgraceful to the victims and allows this sort of tragedy to happen again and again.

"

NZ is so small that they will never have the problems of right/left wing propaganda against minorities becoming attractive.

I wouldn't be so sure, I heard kiwi right-wingers complain about the steadily increasing Asian minority there more than once.

"

In Germany a dirty nationalist party is on 6% in polls atm ranging up to 10% in some areas.
In countries like France, it's even possible France National(yeah they are on the same level as Hitler) will win a presidential election.

It only takes 1 national lunatic to win a vote and it will be the same situation as in 1933.

The Erbschuld is strong in this one. Right-wing parties are strong all over Europe and that's totally okay. Not every country has to be like Germany or Sweden where only leftists are allowed in the parliament.