• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

Deadly Shootings, Explosions In Paris

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
but but but, I thought mass killings and attacks like this only occurred in the US due to our lax gun laws....

Also not surprised Obama is hesitant to mention ISIS but the administration had no trouble blaming a video for the attack on the embassy.

I am supposed to travel to that area shortly, guessing those plans will change.

Its a horrible event for sure but when terrorist groups aren't dealt with effectively what do people expect?
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,587
10,286
136
So a French journalist on MSNBC just said that there has been a lot of chatter about "imminent attacks" in the past few days--she literally said they were "waiting for something to happen" but were expecting something closer to Christmas holidays...again may support the theory that a planned attack was moved up haphazardly as a response to Jihadi John's death.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
Why is it that some rather than just consider that there might be some politics that may be involved in this catastrophe, instead jump right into partisan politics while ignoring the terrorist attacks themselves.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
What a compelling argument this carnage is for controlling borders. When will we start? Probably right after sanctuary cities go away.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
I hear on TV report that the French President said the border is closed for now and France is under state of emergency.

good.i wonder if its to little to late.


seemed a odd thing to allow them all in when on the way they were destroying shit.

meh.
 

Blanky

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2014
2,457
12
46
I haven't thus far shared my opinion that the US should go into Iraq and Syria with ground troops because this board has a very isolationist bent and I didn't feel like arguing the point. The fact is, these people will only grow more powerful until they are finally taken down, and they will never, ever be taken down until western powers and/or perhaps Russia undertakes a major ground campaign to remove them. I'd prefer that Russia did it, at least in Syria, but eventually we are going to do it if Russia does not.

What is happening in Paris is going to happen in the US eventually, and my bet is sooner rather than later. If it is a major attack with dozens to hundreds dead, at that point we won't have a choice. We may as well do it before it happens.

Those who think we'll be safe if we do the opposite and stop bombing them are naive. If we stop, they acquire more territory and only get stronger. We know the Arab armies are too weak and incompetent to take them on. It can't possibly do anything but get worse without western intervention, and the violence certainly will not be confined to the middle east.

They are already no ordinary terrorist group. They have billions in oil revenue and over 10 million people under their control. This isn't a state sponsored terrorist group - this is a terrorist state, and they will not stop killing people, both Muslim and western, until they are destroyed. These people are from another century. They want to murder everyone non-Muslin and every Muslim not practicing their version of it. These people do not belong in this world and need to be removed from it.


To be clear, I don't want to nation build in either country. I want us to go in with an overwhelming force and sweep through their territories on a search and destroy mission, then go home. This is what we should have done in Afghanistan in 2001 but which Bush was too incompetent to understand, and it's what we should do right now in Iraq.

And the fact that Bush's disastrous Iraq war had a hand in creating a fertile environment for Isis only strengthens the argument here. If we are partially responsible for the death and misery these people have wrought, then it is our moral obligation to clean it up.
Radical Islam is responsible for this. Short of literally killing everyone in the middle east you cannot remove it. Instead, you simply pull out of the middle east, let them live like the idiots they seem to want to live like, and stop allowing immigration from these nations except in very special cases. Internally, you do what you can to continue to marginalize the religion as the anachronistic cancer that it is on civilized society.
 

Bacstar

Golden Member
Nov 2, 2006
1,273
30
91
Anger and rage...reminiscent of how I felt when the World Trade Center was attacked. My condolences to the French, even more heart wrenching now having visited Paris a few years ago.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Shut your fucking mouth and start using your fucking brain for once. If you think it would be much more difficult for terrorists with automatic kalashnikovs, bullet-proof vests, and grenades to take down a few 72 year old men with pistols than you are sorely mistaken. Plus they only need to be on guard once, you need to be on guard your whole life. With how much you seem to get involved with science you ought to know smarter than to listen to Sean Hannity and other bullshit.

It's a shame you feel so defeated that you've taken the position that whatever happens, happens. You don't believe anything will give you an ounce of hope or advantage.
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,587
10,286
136
Stupid liberal PC pussy immigration policies caused this. hate to say they deserved it, but everyone with a brain saw this coming
I could just as easily say "stupid European colonialist policies caused this" if *I* wanted to talk out my ass. But more likely this is ISIS' response to pressure they are facing in Iraq and Syria from Russia, the West, the Kurds, FSA, etc. Errybody is starting to gang up on them now so ISIS sympathizers are getting attacks in now before they are found and given permanent detention.

I think it's sad and somewhat pathetic that the US and UN allowed Putin to claim the "savior of Syria" title. We should have had our own coalition without Russia but wanted to twiddle our thumbs with the UN Security Council instead.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Why is it that some rather than just consider that there might be some politics that may be involved in this catastrophe, instead jump right into partisan politics while ignoring the terrorist attacks themselves.
Because it's important to keep hammering into thick skulls that there are consequences for actions that are blatantly wrong. Borders must be secured, borders must be protected, nations need to know who is entering and who is leaving.

If you're too far out of your safe space in this thread, step away from the computer.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
Because it's important to keep hammering into thick skulls that there are consequences for actions that are blatantly wrong. Borders must be secured, borders must be protected, nations need to know who is entering and who is leaving.

If you're too far out of your safe space in this thread, step away from the computer.

I could just as easily say "stupid European colonialist policies caused this" if *I* wanted to talk out my ass. But more likely this is ISIS' response to pressure they are facing in Iraq and Syria from Russia, the West, the Kurds, FSA, etc. Errybody is starting to gang up on them now so ISIS sympathizers are getting attacks in now before they are found and given permanent detention.

I think it's sad and somewhat pathetic that the US and UN allowed Putin to claim the "savior of Syria" title. We should have had our own coalition without Russia but wanted to twiddle our thumbs with the UN Security Council instead.

yadda ... yadda ... yadda .....