Paris shootings

[josephpalazzo]

At least it was only Islamist dickbags that got killed this time.

There were more than 5,000 bullets fired, and when the woman blew herself up, the explosion was so strong that the floor underneath her collapsed to the next floor. Must have been one hell of a firework...

[The Skeletal Atheist]

There were more than 5,000 bullets fired, and when the woman blew herself up, the explosion was so strong that the floor underneath her collapsed to the next floor. Must have been one hell of a firework...

5,000 rounds? They had the aiming skills of Imperial Storm Troopers.

[SilentFutility]

When media outlets claim this:

"we can’t allow ISIS to achieve its goal of framing this as a fight pitting Islam against the West"

I can't help but get a bit annoyed. How on earth can someone born and raised in a western country who is not an ISIS member possibly claim to know that that's their goal is the group hasn't stated that that is what they are trying to achieve?

Protip: They can't because they've made up that goal.

[TomFoolery]

How on earth can someone born and raised in a western country who is not an ISIS member possibly claim to know that that's their goal if the group hasn't stated that that is what they are trying to achieve?

Protip: They can't because they've made up that goal.

ISIS does have concrete and established goals. They imagine the end of days is upon us and want to bring about an Islamic caliphate across the Middle East. They want control over the world's Muslim population and will take it by force. That isn't my conjecture, that's according to their own propaganda.

So it would logically follow that anything that would help them achieve those means is what ISIS wants. They don't have to say it explicitly for it to be a means to an end. By refusing refugees and stirring up anti-Islamic sentiment, we're only adding fuel to their cause and rallying more people to it.

If I want the Patriots to win the Super Bowl, I can want good teams to do poorly and bad teams to succeed because it helps my overall end game by ensuring the Patriots face off against a weaker opponent. Do I need to directly say I hope they face off against the Vikings who are 7-3 and not the Panthers who are 10-0?

[mauricio]

ISIS does have concrete and established goals. They imagine the end of days is upon us and want to bring about an Islamic caliphate across the Middle East. They want control over the world's Muslim population and will take it by force. That isn't my conjecture, that's according to their own propaganda.

So it would logically follow that anything that would help them achieve those means is what ISIS wants. They don't have to say it explicitly for it to be a means to an end. By refusing refugees and stirring up anti-Islamic sentiment, we're only adding fuel to their cause and rallying more people to it.

If I want the Patriots to win the Super Bowl, I can want good teams to do poorly and bad teams to succeed because it helps my overall end game by ensuring the Patriots face off against a weaker opponent. Do I need to directly say I hope they face off against the Vikings who are 7-3 and not the Panthers who are 10-0?

This also cuts the other way. Far right nationalist groups gain prominence due to the inability to speak clearly on the topic of islam due to political correctness and the shut down of debate on the europe migration issue with condemnations of racism and xenophobia. And that's part of what worries me about the immigration I have seen many videos of immigrants breaking the law by forcing their way through borders, refusing to identify themselves or be registered, fighting the police and contracting smugglers. If the people who try to talk about this issues are all condemned guilty of bigotry by association, just because some bigots may agree with them, they are going to be disenfranchised and might join the bigots because they are the only one's willing to listen. This may result in cascade of radicalization when this groups start harassing immigrants and they respond in kind.

[SilentFutility]

ISIS does have concrete and established goals. They imagine the end of days is upon us and want to bring about an Islamic caliphate across the Middle East. They want control over the world's Muslim population and will take it by force. That isn't my conjecture, that's according to their own propaganda.

So it would logically follow that anything that would help them achieve those means is what ISIS wants. They don't have to say it explicitly for it to be a means to an end. By refusing refugees and stirring up anti-Islamic sentiment, we're only adding fuel to their cause and rallying more people to it.

If I want the Patriots to win the Super Bowl, I can want good teams to do poorly and bad teams to succeed because it helps my overall end game by ensuring the Patriots face off against a weaker opponent. Do I need to directly say I hope they face off against the Vikings who are 7-3 and not the Panthers who are 10-0?

Yes ISIS have stated their goals in their numerous forms of propaganda media.

As far as I'm aware, stirring up anti-islamic sentiment in Europe is not one of those explicitly stated goals.

It does not just automatically logically follow that stirring up this sentiment in Europe is one of their goals as whether or not that helps or hinders their cause is very much open for debate.

Your "football analogy" is overly simplistic, as it assumes that anti-islamic sentiment is the west "doing badly". International politics and war are rarely as black and white as this, and this situation is no exception.

[Baruch]

Getting from 1937 to 1945 was very non-linear ... the leaders then had to step very carefully or lose badly.  This WW III will be no different.  WW II started in 1937 in China ... if you forget Fascist aggression in Manchuria, Spain and Ethiopia.  Technically Europe remained under partial Fascist occupation, until Franco in Spain and the Portuguese dictatorship folded.

[TomFoolery]

Your "football analogy" is overly simplistic, as it assumes that anti-islamic sentiment is the west "doing badly". International politics and war are rarely as black and white as this, and this situation is no exception.

There were obviously a lot of tensions in Europe before the Paris attacks, but in the U.S. people mostly didn't care. I get that plenty of people on these forums care, but for the most part fears about Islam, refugees, and terrorism weren't at the top of anyone's agenda. ISIS had launched many attacks before Paris, including one in my hometown of Garland, TX back in May, and people still went on obsessing about the Kardashians and worrying about gay rights. Thanks to geography, Americans feel they are allowed to have different priorities than their European allies, especially when ISIS had confined itself to mostly things like car bombings in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Saudi, Tunisia, Yemen, and Afghanistan. "Brown people" killing "brown people" seems like the never ending story. I swear to you, if you asked the average American on the street, they couldn't point to any of those countries on a map and an embarrassing number would probably swear we were at war with them already. Anti-Islamic sentiment may not have been doing "badly," but there's no question it's doing better now in the wake of the Paris attacks.

There's no question that the situation in that region is so complicated when you look at all the angles between Al Assad, Russia, Turkey, the U.S., Al Qaeda, Iran, and ISIS. But if the only question is do terrorist attacks have trickle down effects that are beneficial to ISIS, of course they do. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing them. Making Western countries too afraid to take in refugees for fear they might be terrorists is an amazing kickback of terrorism because then refugees get desperate, and desperate people do strange things, such as turn to terrorism.

[FaithIsFilth]

Independent/ alternative media censored in France. Holy shit. Fuck you France, you cunts. Are we going to see the US and other Western countries follow in their footsteps? What happens when there is a similar attack in the US? The end of freedom? How many rights are they going to take away? Edit: Some in the comment section are saying this was not blocked by the French Government and that it was blocked for a bunch of people some other way (although it was only blocked in France, plus the countries it is usually blocked in). There are others claiming other stuff like some Facebook stuff being censored over there. I'm not too sure what the French Government is actually censoring, but at this point, they have the go ahead to pretty much censor whatever they want.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BPNzxLcF08

[Baruch]

Independent/ alternative media censored in France. Holy shit. Fuck you France, you cunts. Are we going to see the US and other Western countries follow in their footsteps? What happens when there is a similar attack in the US? The end of freedom? How many rights are they going to take away?

You have no real rights.  Any rights we told you ... you had ... was just propaganda that you were a stupid peasant to believe in anyway!  But for me, I can't wait for Madame Guillotine to resume business ;-(

[SilentFutility]

There were obviously a lot of tensions in Europe before the Paris attacks, but in the U.S. people mostly didn't care. I get that plenty of people on these forums care, but for the most part fears about Islam, refugees, and terrorism weren't at the top of anyone's agenda. ISIS had launched many attacks before Paris, including one in my hometown of Garland, TX back in May, and people still went on obsessing about the Kardashians and worrying about gay rights. Thanks to geography, Americans feel they are allowed to have different priorities than their European allies, especially when ISIS had confined itself to mostly things like car bombings in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Saudi, Tunisia, Yemen, and Afghanistan. "Brown people" killing "brown people" seems like the never ending story. I swear to you, if you asked the average American on the street, they couldn't point to any of those countries on a map and an embarrassing number would probably swear we were at war with them already. Anti-Islamic sentiment may not have been doing "badly," but there's no question it's doing better now in the wake of the Paris attacks.

There's no question that the situation in that region is so complicated when you look at all the angles between Al Assad, Russia, Turkey, the U.S., Al Qaeda, Iran, and ISIS. But if the only question is do terrorist attacks have trickle down effects that are beneficial to ISIS, of course they do. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing them. Making Western countries too afraid to take in refugees for fear they might be terrorists is an amazing kickback of terrorism because then refugees get desperate, and desperate people do strange things, such as turn to terrorism.

Anti-islamic sentiment in western countries cannot just automatically be assumed to be a goal of ISIS. You're just coming up with some possibile scenarios in which it might be beneficial to them. Western countries have already taken absolutely loads of refugees. The refugees are the ones running away from ISIS, they won't just suddenly decide to become ISIS militants if they can't escape their persecution.

Anti-islamic sentiment in western countries also provokes some action and changes by them, such as intensifying bombing campaigns, possibly boots on the ground, building sympathy for the Assad regime etc. etc.

There are multiple possible outcomes from the current situation. Their only explicit goal during the attack was to kill westerners, French westerners in particular. Any potential intended knock on effects are being assumed by you and you have yet to prove otherwise. Demonstrating possible outcomes in which anti-islamic sentiment might aid their cause (when arguably it could also hinder it) is not proving that stirring up anti-islamic sentiment was or is one of their goals.

[Baruch]

And ... people still assume that this wasn't a false flag attack ... and that the French government didn't know about it before hand, or actually run it.  People simply never learn from history ... this has all been done before.  But this time it is different.  Shiranu had an excellent posting on suicide attacks ... it is mostly by 3rd World people fighting your and my colonialism.  Of course walking to work rather than driving a car ... is not an option, so we will simply have to continue to occupy and kill them until the last drop or gasp of petroleum product.  Because we are so .... innocent!

[SilentFutility]

And ... people still assume that this wasn't a false flag attack ... and that the French government didn't know about it before hand, or actually run it.  People simply never learn from history ... this has all been done before.  But this time it is different.  Shiranu had an excellent posting on suicide attacks ... it is mostly by 3rd World people fighting your and my colonialism.  Of course walking to work rather than driving a car ... is not an option, so we will simply have to continue to occupy and kill them until the last drop or gasp of petroleum product.  Because we are so .... innocent!

[citation needed]

[Baruch]

Other than 5000 years of criminal government behavior?  Which gives plausibility to every false flag or other immoral act?

I said ... assume ... do I have to provide proof that some people have made this assumption?  It is all over the Internet, every time something like this happens.

Or are you objecting to my mentioning the Middle Class victimhood model that claims that ... just because my taxes paid for droning those wedding and funerals, that I am not guilty of aiding and abetting a criminal activity?

[Shiranu]

And ... people still assume that this wasn't a false flag attack ... and that the French government didn't know about it before hand, or actually run it.  People simply never learn from history ... this has all been done before.  But this time it is different.  Shiranu had an excellent posting on suicide attacks ... it is mostly by 3rd World people fighting your and my colonialism.  Of course walking to work rather than driving a car ... is not an option, so we will simply have to continue to occupy and kill them until the last drop or gasp of petroleum product.  Because we are so .... innocent!

This is where we will have to deviate a bit :P. I really don't believe it was a false flag... I truly believe that governments can be incompetent and not prepare for the consequences of their actions. And this was a situation I don't know if any amount of preparing outside of severely infringing on civil rights can truly prepare you for.

I tend to lean towards ignorance (and I mean that neutrally as "not knowing" rather than "intentionally not knowing") being the primary factor in politics rather than maliciousness.