Breaking: Paris shootings and explosions near Stade de France kill 129

[Brian4Liberty]

Terrorism is a criminal act, not an act of war, unless perpetrated by a nation state. ISIS/AQ/etc are not nation states. Don't fall for the perception change of what constitutes an act of war! Terrorism is a criminal act, not a war act and therefore triggers no NATO agreements.

Yes, except for the fact that ISIS does have a territory, and essentially, a nation right now.

Unfortunately those who have their finger on the button today don't really care about such formalities...

Question is what are the citizens who don't want more war going to physically do to those who insist on waging it?

Protesting, typing and whining don't have any effect on the warmongers.

That's how it works. And compared to all of the grossly outrageous violations and distortions of laws and treaties committed by our masters and their puppets (Obama, for instance), the argument that ISIS is a nation and they have engaged in an act of war against France is barely a stretch. No DA in the world would ever lose that case.

 

[fr33]

"Yes, our founders did indeed understand guerrilla rebellion and they practiced it."

true enough. and they addressed this matter with "letters of marque and reprisal"

eh?

Yeah I agree. Fighting terrorism is not a new thing. I'm just trying to wake people up about the reality of violence. We have some really sheltered people here.

For instance, the founders beat the shit out of cattle and horses so that those animals could plow their fields. Still today that is how horses are saddle-broken. We now live in a country of people far removed from any reality of how they got here. They blab about how people in more primitive times didn't understand violence even though they lived in more violent times.

 

[AngryCanadian]

I do business with a large military base nearby. I've never seen it so busy. Get ready for war, my friends.

Let me guess an excuse to intervene in Syria?

 

[AngryCanadian]

No. They should go united with Russia. Isis is much more dangerous than Assad and a much greater threat to this nation and its allies. Russia is not the boogey man. It's these cold blooded murderers screaming Allahu Akbar in the name of Islam.

ISIS? Oh u mean those lovely bunch of none existent moderates who behead kurds and Christians? and are financed by USAID? i hear ya.

 

[UWDude]

Geeze, after that Charlie Hebdo masterpiece, where they made an unfunny cartoon about the Russian Jet bombing that killed 244... ...I hope the one about this attack is at least a bit funnier.

 

[LibertyEagle]

From the article...

The gunmen's motives were not immediately confirmed, but one witness at the Bataclan heard one of the attackers appear to express support for the militant Islamic State (IS) group.

"It's Hollande's fault, he shouldn't have intervened in Syria!" the man shouted, according to French news agency AFP, citing the French president's decision to take part in Western air strikes on IS.

Paris saw three days of attacks in early January, when Islamist gunmen murdered 18 people, attacking satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, a Jewish supermarket and a policewoman on patrol.

Perhaps they and the U.S. should not have stuck their big noses into Syria with a wet dream of overthrowing their duly-elected president Assad, and to accomplish that, arming and funding the creation of ISIS. Which then led to a mass displacement of pissed off muslims dispersing all over Europe.

 

[navy-vet]

Christians have been flocking back to some of the Syrian cities recently liberated from the Isis occupation there. They are very eager to go back, which is why we should be aiding Russia in defeating Isis instead of creating obstacles.

I have heard that it was the "Obamanation" who created ISIS in an effort to take down Assad. I also heard that it was the "Hildebeast" that helped to arm them. I personally remember watching on BBC the column of ISIS that stretched out for miles enter Iraq while the Obamanation just watched. Yeah, I'm sure they will jump right on that.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Isis is much more dangerous than Assad and a much greater threat to this nation and its allies.

On the contrary, ISIS is not any threat at all to this nation, or any other (outside Syria and Iraq, anyway).

100+ people killed?

That's called a small fraction of the annual murder tally, not a threat to national security.

Terrorism has never been, and will never be, a national security issue (so long as they don't obtain nuclear/biological weapons*).

*and the way to prevent that is to work with foreign governments to secure those weapons, rather than chasing the snakbars round the desert

 

[PaleoPaul]

On the contrary, ISIS is not any threat at all to this nation, or any other (outside Syria and Iraq, anyway).

100+ people killed?

That's called a small fraction of the annual murder tally, not a threat to national security.

Terrorism has never been, and will never be, a national security issue (so long as they don't obtain nuclear/biological weapons).

It's pretty significant for Paris though.

 

[wizardwatson]

https://www.rt.com/news/321884-paris-hostages-concert-shooting/

One of the gunmen at Bataclan reportedly shouted: "It's for Syria" and "Allahu Akbar!" meaning, “God is [the] greatest” in Arabic.

I'm confused. Is this a terrorist fighting against Assad that we we arming or one fighting against Assad that we weren't? Or is this a terrorist who supports Assad but is mad because we are destabilizing Syria and perhaps was fighting another group we were supporting?

But seriously, why would the terrorist say "for Syria?" Seems strangely ambiguous. Why not say "for ISIS" or for the caliphate or something?

 

[navy-vet]

https://www.rt.com/news/321884-paris-hostages-concert-shooting/



I'm confused. Is this a terrorist fighting against Assad that we we arming or one fighting against Assad that we weren't? Or is this a terrorist who supports Assad but is mad because we are destabilizing Syria and perhaps was fighting another group we were supporting?

But seriously, why would the terrorist say "for Syria?" Seems strangely ambiguous. Why not say "for ISIS" or for the caliphate or something?

They aren't rocket scientists you know.

 

[fr33]

I can't let it go, sorry. History repeats itself. You have not learned your lesson.

Unfortunately this brand of terrorism is not something our founders could have foreseen. They were used to dealing with countries that had a government and a standing army or navy. This is an organized group with an agenda.

The "founders" themselves killed millions of Indians.They wiped out civilizations that had no navy or army. And they wiped out many that had an army but no navy. You seemed offended by me labeling your post as romanticized bullshit but I can't think of any other term to describe it. Are you really this ignorant? What books have you read? The early european americans were not angels. They knew much more about violence than you could ever hope to.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

It's pretty significant for Paris though.

So is the murder rate in Chicago for Chicagoans (or every individual murder for the victim) - doesn't make it a national security issue.

Anybody speaking of the "war on terror" in the same breath as, say, the Cold War (where we faced global annihilation) is either full of shit or utterly insane.

^^^Those options are not mutually exclusive, I suppose.

 

[TER]

On the contrary, ISIS is not any threat at all to this nation, or any other (outside Syria and Iraq, anyway).

So you believe. Let's just hope they never get a dirty bomb.

 

[specsaregood]

Now I see that 7 of 8 terrorists detonated vests.

This is just so cowardly.

I don't understand the cowardly comment. What is cowardly about it? It's the upmost commitment and the exact opposite of cowardly. Not that I support these people, but cowardly doesn't fit.

 

[twomp]

If France really wanted to take revenge, they would be preparing to attack Saudia Arabia, Qatar and Turkey right now but will they do that? No, they will try and remove Assad because that would make much more sense.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

I have a prediction. Yes, all this was a direct result of the west getting involved in middle east politics. This does not negate the horrific act against innocent people by "Muslim extremists". My prediction is that the French men in general and perhaps other European men will start to take things into their own hands. You can expect many attacks against Muslims living in Europe after this...

 

[PaleoPaul]

Europe in 2015=Eurabia.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

So you believe. Let's just hope they never get a dirty bomb.

Sure, that's a concern, and there are a number of things we could do to minimize that risk.

But my point is that our reaction needs to be proportional to the danger.

We are not talking about an "existential threat" as the warmongers would have people believe.

We're talking about a threat that's almost certainly never going to kill more people per year than traffic accidents.

#perspective

In the meantime, we have limited resources.

If there's an existential threat here, it's not terrorism, but our overreaction to it.

Civilizations don't collapse because some dipshits shoot up some movie theaters.

They do collapse from excessive military spending and resulting economic ruination.

 

[Ender]

I can't let it go, sorry. History repeats itself. You have not learned your lesson.

The "founders" themselves killed millions of Indians.They wiped out civilizations that had no navy or army. And they wiped out many that had an army but no navy. You seemed offended by me labeling your post as romanticized bullshit but I can't think of any other term to describe it. Are you really this ignorant? What books have you read? The early european americans were not angels. They knew much more about violence than you could ever hope to.

Yep- it was the Brits who introduced massive scalping to the Americas. A couple of tribes only used scalping for certain rituals. The Brits were well known for it and paid $10 for every Indian scalp- man, woman, or child.