• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Paris Terrorist Attacks, 120+ dead. Do not post hearsay/unsourced/old news.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hate to say it but the country should have been taken over and never have been given back.

9/11 happened when I was in 8th grade and I remember asking my history teacher about the possibility of the US staying in Iraq and making it a territory or state after the war. Of course as an 8th grader I had little understanding of things, but I'm reminded of that.

But thinking more, that might have to be a possible solution. Obviously not a state or territory but a full-blown and continued occupation after any conflict/war with a gradual establishment of a non-lesser of two evils government, restrictions, build basic infrastructure and education systems, etc., over a long period of time. Essentially like a Japan model. And yeah that war would include going into soverign nations that might not outright support organizations like ISIS, but either will not or cannot do anything to stop/control ISIS.

Can't pull a Iraq, do a half-committed (and unjustified) war, then a half-committed "rebuilding" and expect more shit to not hit the fan. But I understand - short of larger attacks, there will be little support for such a sustained large military presence.

I don't know. That probably won't work either as this is a different type of enemy, but I'm at a loss of how to effectively address this. Rebuilding is probably the best bet, but I fear near total war is needed first before that can realistically happen. I'm not sure targeted assassinations are the answer.
 

kneePat

Member
Very naive. You really don't know what ISIL really is or what it is entirely consist of. You really think it is because its poor brown people and somehow making all those nations somehow prosperous is going fix much? I don't anyone know how many decades it will take for that to happen and how many people will be killed since we can't start a fight, but ISIL will. Only two of those countries have anything to do with ISIL . Iraq war were the remaining sunni terrorists groups joined up with ex-saddam officials, and with the civil war in Syria it was a natural focus point for jihadists all that became ISIL. Besides many foreigners ISIL aren't even poor and so the only point you was right about was ideology, and many joined them because of that and wasn't poor.


Anyway, the only way to hurt ISIL is through taking their territory and killing/capturing their leadership and destroy their infrastructure. If you really point those nations to all nice and rich then you have to defeat ISIL, because how else are you going to make all those nations(Iraq and Syria mostly) nice and cozy when they are there actively killing people? A war/battle/conflict has to be fought and no sugar coating and looking through western glasses is going to fix that.

I think it is honestly you who is naive. Ending ISIS will not end terrorism. But sure, bank on this short term reformation provided by jaded westerners.
 
20 million followers out of 1+ Billion Muslims. Not only that, they're considered apostates in some circles.

I'm not bashing on your beleifs, I'm pointing out Ahmadiyya followers out of mainstream Islam are miniscule.
The apostasy belief is because of the prophethood interpretation, everything else is the same. We are more Sunni than Shia are closer to Sunni. The Saudis are afraid we are right as per their own language so they forced pakistan to change their constitution
 

Kin5290

Member
It's worth noting that ISIS is only drawing such a following from other Islamists because it's currently winning, or is seen to be untouchable, and people love a winner.
 
Just got home and heard about what happen. Terrorist fucking suck and I hope France is able to find whatever bastards are left that did this.

Feel bad for the refugees too because now people in the EU against them have an argument.
 
I'm stunned you don't even know ISIS and their ideologies, yet have absolutely no qualms about enlisting for military action.

Do you even know what you'd be up against and why?

When you enlist you have no idea who you will be fighting and why, you're not in charge. It is rational that many people want to protect their fellow citizens from harm, you don't need a doctorate in Mid East politics or Islamic theology to want do that.
 
nah, could you tell me how isis could be stopped by using non violent actions? since it's oretty obvious you're against the violent action idea based on your posts in this thread

Do as much as possible to isolate them, cut them off from oil supply, assassinate leaders if possible, huge counter propaganda campaign on social networks which target ISIS supporters, not getting involved in internal politics of every middle eastern nation (let things play out), etc.
 

Lashley

Why does he wear the mask!?
I'm worried some wackos might do something in England again like 7/7. I was on holiday in Paris 10 years ago when that event took place. I would never have thought this would happen in Paris a decade on. Sad times.

I'm surprised they haven't attacked us again tbh
 

Mesousa

Banned
It's worth noting that ISIS is only drawing such a following from other Islamists because it's currently winning, or is seen to be untouchable, and people love a winner.

Their head executioner dude got vaporized like 24 hours ago. People can't really think they are untouchable can they?
 
This. They need to be shown the only prophecy which will
Come true for them is a gun shot in the head of Baghdadi

Killing Baghdadi doesn't require a ground invasion either now does it. Bin Laden was in Pakistan while soldiers were dying in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban. Afghanistan was justified but it's also a permanent occupation. Now you wanna add in Iraq and Syria (where Russia still backing Assad btw). Where's next?

Seriously, nothing you've said makes any real sense. You just want a ground invasion and the complete and total eradication of IS and, I assume, all jihad ideology. Good luck with that bud.
 
FIrst of all, I can't believe the Represenative tweeted this:

Rep. Jeff DuncanVerified account
‏@RepJeffDuncan
How's that Syrian refugee resettlement look now? How about that mass migration into Europe? Terrorism is alive & well in the world. #No

https://twitter.com/RepJeffDuncan/status/665326737924976641



Second, I can't believe he's responding to people mad at him:

James Murphy ‏@jamesmurphypdx 1h1 hour ago
@RepJeffDuncan how many Muslim terrorists killed 9 people in a church this year in South Carolina Jeff?

Rep. Jeff Duncan ‏@RepJeffDuncan 1h1 hour ago
@jamesmurphypdx so, you are saying that Islamist terrorist haven't committed acts of terror in US?
 
I think that is the only viable response other than liberating cities we know are under their control at the moment.

It won't help if there's ISIS support in those cities. Urban warfare is extremely dangerous and when you have population which isn't on your side it's not helping anyone. Maybe liberating cities one by one could work, but from what I understand ISIS gets some support in the areas that it's controlling...
 
Killing Baghdadi doesn't require a ground invasion either now does it. Bin Laden was in Pakistan while soldiers were dying in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban.

Seriously, nothing you've said makes any real sense. You just want a ground invasion and the complete and total eradication of IS and, I assume, all Jihad ideology. Good luck with that bud.

Bin laden hid among Taliban and Pakistanis. On baghdadi, Saudis won't accept him, turkey will kill him, Lebanon will kill him, Iran will kill him, Assad will kill him

He is landlocked and surrounded

All that is needed is an attack towards them
 

megalowho

Member
Emotions running high in this thread now that the news has subsided a bit. Lots of sniping at posters, insults and hijacking replies to go off on separate tangents. Goodnight all, stay safe and strong France.
 

Zabant

Member
9/11 happened when I was in 8th grade and I remember asking my history teacher about the possibility of the US staying in Iraq and making it a territory or state after the war. Of course as an 8th grader I had little understanding of things, but I'm reminded of that.

But thinking more, that might have to be a possible solution. Obviously not a state or territory but a full-blown and continued occupation after any conflict/war with a gradual establishment of a non-lesser of two evils government, restrictions, build basic infrastructure and education systems, etc., over a long period of time. Essentially like a Japan model.

Can't pull a Iraq, do a half-committed (and unjustified) war, then a half-committed "rebuilding" and expect more shit to not hit the fan. But I understand - short of larger attacks, there will be little support for such a sustained large military presence.

I don't know. That probably won't work either as this is a different type of enemy, but I'm at a loss of how to effectively address this. Rebuilding is probably the best bet, but I fear near total war is needed first before that can realistically happen.

The first thing that should have happened is redrawing the stupid fucking borders that britain made, lumping disparate groups of people who hate each other together into one 'country' (Iraq) was a bad idea.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Thanks for diluting my point by calling it "Kumbaya". Great response.

This story has played out the exact same way since the 90s as it will again and again. There is going to be an ISIS, and Al Queda, a Taliban that is the definition of evil that MUST be stopped, and then it will be all well and good. Hey, we'll even help the Iraqis set up their own FreeGovernment and everything will be perfect!

Western involvement in the Middle East has been cyclical and catastrophic. I don't know what the answer is -- and if I did, maybe I'd have a Nobel Prize -- but being Charlie Brown when Lucy is about to tee up the football again is not the answer.



Me neither.

The world is such as it is. You could hope for that perfect world where there are no dictators, no poor countries, no violence. But that's not our current world. It has never been perfect. It will never be perfect. There will always be many places on this planet with great instability, very poor people, wars etc. That will help serial killers gain adepts. Because this is what these people are, serial killers. You can't stop serial killers from appearing. But you can stop them from killing. So yeah. there will always be some scumbag organization to hunt, but that shouldn't stop us from stopping the current scumbag organization from killing more. The serial killer is using some crappy situation to justify his crimes, they always do, but in fact they kill for pleasure. The same with the terrorist organisation. It might be about revenge and religion with the stupid adepts, but the higher ranks are always there for pleasure to kill and power. You can't stop that with all the goodwill in the world. Because if you do, we wouldn't need prisons in the western world.
 
Going into Iraq and doing what you just said is what allows groups like ISIS to thrive in the first place. How is doing more of the same going to fix the problem.

It is not "doing more of the same" . Iraq war is nothing like what is going on now. It is more like the much more dangerous and volatile, violent insurgency on steroids. Besides we already in Iraq, but not frontline soldiers. To answer your question anyway, the people fighting ISIL are simply going to kill many ISIL soldiers and take their territory. Getting rid of ISIL will be like getting rid on the terrorist groups during the insurgency( which we didn't). I really don't see anyway one saying anything, besides either questioning people or sayin we should leave ( like somehow ISIL will stop ).
 

Miracle

Member
Man this whole world is crazy. :( Just saw CNN report 153 people dead.

Anybody know what group did this? Was it really Isis or Isis sympathizers or something else?
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
If we start another all-out war in the middle east, we should at least have a better plan for how to deal with the situation afterwards. I have the impression that much of the problems in that region are due to the fact that the borders of the nations in that region do not align at all with the ethnic groups and identities that exist there.

So if we remove ISIS (and Assad, or whoever else we fancy conquering) from that map, it might be a good point in time to think about splitting up nations like Iraq and involving the ethnic groups there in deciding on new nations and borders.
 

Salsa

Member
how did they get these guns in there?

no searches, no nothing.

kinda surprised more people arent talking about this aspect of the whole thing

crazy they'd be able to pull something like this over security so soon after Hebdo. I remember Hollande instantly promising to go HAM on protection of public places...
 
Bin laden hid among Taliban and Pakistanis. On baghdadi, Saudis won't accept him, turkey will kill him, Lebanon will kill him, Iran will kill him, Assad will kill him

He is landlocked and surrounded

All that is needed is an attack towards them

What does killing Baghdadi have to do with a ground invasion though? You say you want a ground invasion but if taking out the head is all it takes to bring down IS then what's all this about ground invasion?
 

Breakage

Member
The problem is that Islamism and Jihadism are not a nation with a leadership, a territory, and an army that you can bomb into oblivion. The terrorists who did that today probably didn't need more to exist other than the Internet and a few weapons. This is a war of ideas, and the enemy is Islamism/Jihadism. We should fight that war and support reformers instead of allying with countries like Saudi Arabia who fund the root cause of this ideology.

Yeah the reach of the Internet and social media are game changers that make this war very difficult to win.
Virtually any kind of platform that allows a person to generate and share content can be used to spread material and indoctrinate young impressionable minds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom