ADVERTISEMENT

Terrorism going on in Paris

Ahhh. Now we are getting somewhere! Our Presidents think we are fighting "terrorism", or at least want to portray that to us. But terrorism is only a tactic. No, we are against something bigger than a tactic. We are at war (if we will admit it) against an enemy that wishes to convert or kill all of us. The President cannot come to acknowledge this. And we play along by willy nilly using the T word.

Why can't you just come out and say all of this in your first post. Its easy, "Guys, we shouldn't consider this terrorism, we should consider it an act of war, and here is why . . . . . " Instead, you dole it out piece by piece setting traps for people. And then you bust some guy's balls on an Internet message board for making what you deem to be a mistake that even the Presidents of the United States and France are making.

In the end I agree with your point. I just don't understand why you always have to be such a know-it-all, setting traps along the way so that you can bust people's balls.
 
I agree this can only help the donald
Surely this couldn't have happened Obama assured the world ISIS was under control they were contained, they are the JV.

Boyz this just got a conservative elected here in the states, anyone who doesn't think secured borders will be the #1 concern in the next election has their head in the sand.

Donald build that wall!

No, no - the Mexicans are friendly! If you have to have immigrants get Mexicans and not Muslims! Mexicans don't blow people up...at least up here in the States.

And you can trace this all back to Bush and Cheney destabilizing the Middle East for the foreseeable future. If only those two clowns hadn't been born with small penises.
 
Will you still give him a pass when it happens here?

Would I be willing to give you a pass if you were President?

Well, considering it occurred a couple thousand miles away in a completely different country, where from what I can tell roughly 10 guys decided to take a bunch of AK47's and suicide bombs to as many soft targets as possible?

Yes, I probably would. At this hour, certainly.

I believe Obama is the weakest president of my lifetime...but right here, right now, I don't need the specifics you are demanding. Let them get the facts because quite honestly, I don't want to be given the wrong facts right now just to placate your need for affirmation that your armchair analysis is correct.

The intelligence agencies of the entire world are most likely pouring through millions of pieces of data looking for what you demand at I type this. It's up to you, Ned...but you might want to consider cutting them some slack. If you had the awesome responsibility that Obama has, you'd be curled up in a ball on the floor sobbing uncontrollably right about now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iammrhawkeyes
Just wait till that crap starts happening in this country.And it will.Only a matter of time.
And I am no OIT.
 
Why can't you just come out and say all of this in your first post.

Okay, I really don't want to, and don't mean to, come off as a dick. I guess I believe that a point is more permanently made, and understanding more permanently gained, if you coax understanding out of folks ("What is the evidence so far that this is terrorism?") than if you just declare the point.

The first post used the "terrorism" word. I had my suspicions that this was not terrorism, since the T word is so often mis-used, but I really did not know at the time. It may have been obviously terrorism from the start. But I did not know. OKC was not, for example.
 
Would I be willing to give you a pass if you were President?

Well, considering it occurred a couple thousand miles away in a completely different country, where from what I can tell roughly 10 guys decided to take a bunch of AK47's and suicide bombs to as many soft targets as possible?

Yes, I probably would. At this hour, certainly.

I believe Obama is the weakest president of my lifetime...but right here, right now, I don't need the specifics you are demanding. Let them get the facts because quite honestly, I don't want to be given the wrong facts right now just to placate your need for affirmation that your armchair analysis is correct.

The intelligence agencies of the entire world are most likely pouring through millions of pieces of data looking for what you demand at I type this. It's up to you, Ned...but you might want to consider cutting them some slack. If you had the awesome responsibility that Obama has, you'd be curled up in a ball on the floor sobbing uncontrollably right about now.
Exactly what I suspected all along you would give Obama a pass if it happened here.

You sound foolish no let me correct that you sound simple minded when you say "roughly 10 guys with a bunch of AK 47's" you do know they verbally identified themselves as being ISIS.

But by all means give him a pass.
 
Last edited:
It did happen in this country. 09/11? Remember that?

At what point will congress make a formal declaration of war? I hate the idea of war. It means thousands of dead. Kids losing parents. Its horrible. But trying to solve this politically is nuts. Yes, mistakes were made up to this point. That is besides the point now. We are where we are. France is a member of NATO. This was an attack on NATO. When we fought WWII, we were not discriminate. It was all out. You can't fight war any other way. I hate the idea that kids and innocents die, but its that are just endure this over and over and over.If ISIS is in a village and there are innocents there. Hit it. There were innocent people in Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Dresden too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: herk90
Pretty much is. It rather simple actually.
People who claim otherwise have a political agenda.
No it is not, and you need to understand that. Why do you think something this complicated can possibly be that cut and dry. There is a criteria in which this can be considered cut and dry. You will not like what that criteria is though.
 
No it is not, and you need to understand that. Why do you think something this complicated can possibly be that cut and dry. There is a criteria in which this can be considered cut and dry. You will not like what that criteria is though.


Oh, please enlighten me oh wise one.

Save the "it's all our fault" bullshit. I've heard enough from you liberal pussies. Our President can't even call it Islamic terrorism. It's very simple, convert to their ideology or die. There is very little middle ground on the subject.
 
It did happen in this country. 09/11? Remember that?

At what point will congress make a formal declaration of war? I hate the idea of war. It means thousands of dead. Kids losing parents. Its horrible. But trying to solve this politically is nuts. Yes, mistakes were made up to this point. That is besides the point now. We are where we are. France is a member of NATO. This was an attack on NATO. When we fought WWII, we were not discriminate. It was all out. You can't fight war any other way. I hate the idea that kids and innocents die, but its that are just endure this over and over and over.If ISIS is in a village and there are innocents there. Hit it. There were innocent people in Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Dresden too.

Declare war on whom, for chrissake? Have you really gone as stupid as the rest of this board? Go ahead and send the nukes and turn the entire ME to glass. The assholes you want to nuke AREN'T THERE!!!! They're in Paris, Berlin, London, New York, Los Angeles, etc. You can go ahead and glass the middle east and pound your chest and feel good and these guys are still roaming the world, doing their thing. You've basically got a relatively small group of fanatics who are very good at hiding in the shadows until a few of them come out on a suicide mission. You might not hear from them again for a year or more, but they'll show up again somewhere. The physical middle east may no longer exist but these guys will still be around.

But, as long as it makes you feel good, go ahead and drop some bombs. Moron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the Howler
Declare war on whom, for chrissake? Have you really gone as stupid as the rest of this board? Go ahead and send the nukes and turn the entire ME to glass. The assholes you want to nuke AREN'T THERE!!!! They're in Paris, Berlin, London, New York, Los Angeles, etc. You can go ahead and glass the middle east and pound your chest and feel good and these guys are still roaming the world, doing their thing. You've basically got a relatively small group of fanatics who are very good at hiding in the shadows until a few of them come out on a suicide mission. You might not hear from them again for a year or more, but they'll show up again somewhere. The physical middle east may no longer exist but these guys will still be around.

But, as long as it makes you feel good, go ahead and drop some bombs. Moron.

Whoa....slow down with the name calling there chief.

Its pretty simple. Without oil there is no funding for them. It has nothing to do with pounding my chest. Why would I pound my chest? Of course some are scattered around, but there are a lot of them in Iraq and Syria and we let them produce and sell oil because we dont want to blow up the wells. That's just one example. Its pretty hard to do anything without resources. An attack like paris today took money. Declare war on ISIL. Why not? Whats your idea? Sit there and just wait? Keep trying lame political solutions and BS concepts like the "Arab Spring"?
 
Oh, please enlighten me oh wise one.

Save the "it's all our fault" bullshit. I've heard enough from you liberal pussies. Our President can't even call it Islamic terrorism. It's very simple, convert to their ideology or die. There is very little middle ground on the subject.
Okay then, let us say that they convert to our ideaology. Whatever that may end up being. Are you then fine with that, being that we dictated that action? Spelled out, we made them choose how they were going to think. The very basis for what is considered anti-American.
If so, are you and your ideals any better than theirs? Who are you basing all of these assumptions from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Whoa....slow down with the name calling there chief.

Its pretty simple. Without oil there is no funding for them. It has nothing to do with pounding my chest. Why would I pound my chest? Of course some are scattered around, but there are a lot of them in Iraq and Syria and we let them produce and sell oil because we dont want to blow up the wells. That's just one example. Its pretty hard to do anything without resources. An attack like paris today took money. Declare war on ISIL. Why not? Whats your idea? Sit there and just wait? Keep trying lame political solutions and BS concepts like the "Arab Spring"?
Great. Follow up one dumb post with another one. Hey, if you think oil money is what keeps these terrorists going, then go ahead and nuke every oil producing country, I guess. Whatever makes you feel good. And yes, you do sound like another chest-pounder to me with that kind of talk. These terrorists are a bit more resourceful than you think they are and, no, I don't really have a specific answer on how to stop them. Still I'm pretty sure bombing the crap out of random islamic countries probably isn't the answer.

I imagine there will be a few missiles and smart bombs dropped in a few places and we will dust our hands and say job well done. Next time you go to an airport you'll not only have to take off you belt and shoes but maybe your pants and shirt. Then in a year or 2 or 3 there will be another vicious attack somewhere in the world and we'll bomb a few more places and you'll have to find more stuff to take off in the airport.
 
Great. Follow up one dumb post with another one. Hey, if you think oil money is what keeps these terrorists going, then go ahead and nuke every oil producing country, I guess. Whatever makes you feel good. And yes, you do sound like another chest-pounder to me with that kind of talk. These terrorists are a bit more resourceful than you think they are and, no, I don't really have a specific answer on how to stop them. Still I'm pretty sure bombing the crap out of random islamic countries probably isn't the answer.

I imagine there will be a few missiles and smart bombs dropped in a few places and we will dust our hands and say job well done. Next time you go to an airport you'll not only have to take off you belt and shoes but maybe your pants and shirt. Then in a year or 2 or 3 there will be another vicious attack somewhere in the world and we'll bomb a few more places and you'll have to find more stuff to take off in the airport.

Did I mention nukes anywhere? I don't think so. Do I think you cant wipe it out totally?No. We have the domestic variety as well. I am not sure why we would attack someone randomly, nor would I advocate that. Nor did I. It will take attacking them on different levels and yes some of it is in the middle east. It will take a lot more than dropping a few bombs if we are going to be serious about it. I don't feel good about war of any kind. It isnt nice, but I am not seeing a whole lot of other great options here.

Doing nothing isn't a very good option.
 
Here is the crazy thing about all this (and this isn't to say USA number one just to put it in context how nuts 9/11 was), these guys would have to do what they did in Paris 20 more times to get to the 9/11 death toll.
 
You can't declare war on a relatively small group of terrorists. You just systematically hunt and kill them, like we're doing now. We just need better global support.
They will always break through on occasion, it's impossible to stop. But, the major nations of this world can marginalize and minimize the power and attention the terrorists seek if they work together.
 
now they are steering away from isis { which is made up, does not exist} and steering the narrative towards Syria { which is a thing} and calling them "home grown" terrorists, because, you know what else is home grown?? American right wing extremists with ron paul bumper stickers, and returning vets, vets who own guns. vets who return home -they are gonna equate this with American right wingers.

calling this "home grown" is absolutely horrible, since it is the same bankster cabal funding them-as we use here to fund the healthcare takeover and our political candidates
 
Oh, please enlighten me oh wise one.

Save the "it's all our fault" bullshit. I've heard enough from you liberal pussies. Our President can't even call it Islamic terrorism. It's very simple, convert to their ideology or die. There is very little middle ground on the subject.
How is it not our fault? Is our government not guilty of meddling in their affairs over there. Ask yourself this question, if another country came to our side of the fence, drone bombed, installed regimes, etc, would we not also be in the mood for revenge?
You want to deny that, then that is your decision. I would advise, that you must look at these events and understand how they all came about.
 
not only is it "our fault", it's the new world order's fault and they have sucked us in by installing one of their own as dictator in chief then instructing him he needs to keep up the myth of muslim terrorists so that he may keep droning innocents and overthrowing countries - for some reason
 
see , the new world order and Obama, or "us", we send in the cia , errr, I mean isis or isil, with American accents, we bomb and shoot up france. false flag to get us into war with Syria. and Russia eventually. you silly.
 
false flag blamed on these evil muslim terrorists, fake ghosts, made up cia covert ops, my little darlings.
 
Okay, I'm leaving "conspiracy corner" now....
ha ha, it is kind of strange though how we have to have this constant boogey man isis or al q or big daddy or bin laden, and how when one goes away another pops up. they tried and tried to say okc was done by muslim terrorist. there is a reporter named jayna davis- she's probably still running around telling people about the muslims.
 
France launches its first airstrikes against ISIS in Syria
By Ben Brumfield and Margot Haddad, CNN



Updated 7:09 PM ET, Sun September 27, 2015


(CNN)The French military has carried out its first airstrikes against ISIS in Syria, according to a statement from the office of France's presidency.

The country had announced earlier this month that it would expand its aerial campaign against ISIS in Iraq -- which it began a year ago -- to include the militant group's positions in Syria.

The French president's office said that the strikes in Syria, which began Sunday, were based on intelligence gathered from air surveillance operations conducted over Syria during the past two weeks.

"Our country confirms its firm commitment to the fight against the terrorist threat Daesh," the statement said, using the Arabic acronym for ISIS. "We will strike whenever our national security is at stake."

President Francois Hollande, speaking on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York, described the camp as a "threat to our country."

"We reached our goal and the whole training camp was destroyed," Hollande said.

Six aircraft were used in the mission, which was led by the French but closely coordinated with the U.S.-led coalition, he said.

Despite the "horrible acts" committed by ISIS, Hollande placed the blame for the Syrian crisis on the country's long time strongman Bashar al-Assad.

"Bashar al Assad is the main person at fault, although Daesh commits horrible acts," Hollande said. "The future of Syria cannot happen with Bashar al Assad."



String of terrorist attacks


France has been the site of a number of terrorist attacks this year.

Islamic extremists killed 17 people in a quick succession of attacks in Paris in January, including the shooting deaths of staff members in the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

In June, authorities said a man in southeastern France decapitated his boss, displayed the severed head with Islamist banners and also set off an explosion in a factory. And last month, three American men brought down a suspected terrorist gunman who tried to open fire on a train bound for France.

But France has also linked the refugee crisis Europe is facing in part to ISIS, saying it would strike the group for driving thousands of civilians out of Syria. "We're not going to receive 4 to 5 million Syrians, so the problem has to be dealt with at source," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls told CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

France has been in talks with Russia about a political solution in Syria.

"Russia supports the regime of Bashar (al) Assad. But it also wants to find a political solution. And anyway, there will not be any political solution without a dialogue with all of the parties who directly or indirectly are involved with Syria," Valls said.

France also planned to hold talks about Syria with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.

CNN's Mike Krever contributed to this report.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/27/middleeast/syria-france-isis-bombing/
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemorialRedWarrior
MISES WIRE
The Long History of French Military Intervention in the Middle East and Africa
  • A_French_air_force_Rafale_aircraft_breaks_formation_after_refueling_from_a_U.S._Air_Force_KC-135_Stratotanker_aircraft_assigned_to_the_351st_Expeditionary_Air_Refueling_Squadron_%28EARS%29_over_an_undisclosed_130317-F-BY961-185.jpg
NOVEMBER 16, 2015Ryan McMaken
After the 9/11 Attacks, American politicians invented the "they hate us because we're free" explanation of why the US was a target for international terrorism. The slogan has been especially effective among very ignorant sectors of the population who seemed to be under the impression that the United States had been engaged in non-interventionist foreign policy prior to the 9/11 attacks. "Why, we were just minding our own business," came the shocked and exasperated claims of the know-nothings. "These Arabs just attacked us for no reason, so they must just hate us because we're so doggone free."

Naturally, no one even remotely familiar with the history of the US in the Middle East and the Arabian peninsula would actually believe such assertions so at odds with the facts of the matter, including those who are in favor of more military intervention. Nevertheless, the long history of US-orchestrated coups in the region, the funding of brutal military dictatorship like the one in Egypt, the military presence in Saudi holy sites in the 1990s, 1980s meddling in Libya, the arming of "friends" who later turned out to be enemies, and the US cozy relationship with Israel were all events that provided Islamist radicals with all the help they needed in turning hearts and minds against the US.

A quick look at social media today reveals that many of the same people who imagined the US was "minding its own business" prior to 9/11 now seem to be under the impression that France has a hands-off approach in the Middle East and surrounding areas.

Of course, this position is even more ridiculous since the French have an even longer and arguably more brutal history than the US when it comes to Syria, Lebanon, North Africa, and more.

The Atlantic today has published a helpful summary of French meddling in Africa and the Middle East in recent years. Since September 2014, for example, the French government has engaged in 200 bombing raids in the middle east. The ones conducted on Sunday in retaliation for the Paris murders, was the just one of many:

France has reportedly launched some 200 strikes in Iraq. The French task force is centered around the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, which is currently stationed in the Persian Gulf. According to AFP, French air capacity in the region includes 21 Rafale fighters, nine Super Etendard fighters, and some Mirage jets. (By way of comparison, the U.S. says it has launched nearly 6,400 airstrikes in Syria and Iraq.)

Meanwhile, the French have seen some mission-creep. A year to the month after commencing airstrikes in Iraq, France began flying missions in Syria as well. “In Syria, so long as we haven’t found a political solution; so long as we haven’t destroyed this terrorist group, Islamic State; so long as we haven’t got rid of Bashar Assad; we will not find a solution,” Prime Minister Manuel Valls told Christiane Amanpour in September. In October, French strikes hit an ISIS camp in Raqqa, rumored to be housing foreign fighters including French nationals. Last week, French officials said planes had struck an ISIS-controlled oil refinery in Syria.

It’s worth noting that the ISIS statement translated by SITE makes no explicit mention of Syria. The French military has been heavily involved in operations against Islamist militant groups outside of the Middle East over the last few years, including one group that has pledged fealty to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed caliph. France has deployed 3,000 troops to West Africa—a region where they’ve historically had great influence, as a colonial power and otherwise—with a presence in Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Ivory Coast. The fight in Mali has centered on al-Qaeda affiliated militants, but in Nigeria and surrounding countries, France has been the Western nation most invested in fighting against Boko Haram, the brutal Nigerian Islamist organization. Earlier this year, Boko Haram pledged allegiance to Baghdadi. For radicals inclined to view Western fighting against Muslim groups and nations around the world as part of a larger crusade, France’s military deployment in Africa may be lumped together with its involvement in the Levant.

While it's difficult to take exception to bombs being dropped on the likes of Boko Haram, only the most naive of observers could assert that these bombings and other military actions have not taken their toll on local civilian populations. France has long been bombing, killing, and maiming Middle Easterners and Africans.

And let us not forget that the French government was at the forefront of the NATO war against the Libyan government in 2011, which was part of an effort by colonial European powers to reassert control over a region that was falling under Chinese influence.

Nor do we need to look only to recent events to find evidence of France's long, brutal colonialist history in the region. The Algerian War, for example, which ended only in 1962, led to more than 100,000 dead, which proportionally, was nothing short of a bloodbath in Algeria.

Moreover, the authoritative history of the origins of modern western meddling in the region is David Fromkin's A Peace to End All Peace which details how the French and British governments divided up the middle east among themselves for future government as colonial satraps. Specifically, France was to get Lebanon and Syria as part of the deal. (Britain would get Palestine and Iraq). France and Britain have regarded the region as their unofficial colonial possessions ever since.

Even worse, from the Arab point of view, the Arabs had been told if they fought with the French and British against the Ottoman Empire in World War I (a German ally), the Arab countries would gain national autonomy. T.E. Lawrence, for example, used this bait and switch tactic to get Arab tribes to assist the British throughout what is now Saudi Arabia and Palestine. Lawrence, knew, however, that the French and British had already divided up the former Ottoman empire among themselves. They had already agreed that if the Ottoman Empire could be defeated, the newly independent states that resulted would forever remain under the thumb of Britain and France. And so it would have likely remained indefinitely had the Europeans not veered off course by attempting total self-annihilation in a Second World War, largely due to revanchist and heavy-handed British and French reparations demands placed upon Germany.

So, claims being made today that the French government has been a meek, peaceful lover of human rights will strike the well-informed as absurd. Americans may be blissfully unaware of all of this, but rest assured that angry young men in Iraq, Syria, and North Africa are not.


In this stunning New York Times bestseller, investigative journalist Kenneth R. Timmerman—who lived and worked in France for nearly two decades—exposes the depth of France’s treachery. Reading this shocking insider account, Americans will see their anger at France turn to sheer outrage...Read The French Betrayal of America to find out the unvarnished truth about the supposed ally that the United States should now treat as an enemy.

But look away! That's all ancient history now since we're being told by American militarists that the country they recently told us was "an enemy" is now our closest friend.

https://mises.org/blog/long-history-french-military-intervention-middle-east-and-africa
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemorialRedWarrior
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT