Terror attacks in Paris.

[Bamaro]

A strong US leader would gather world leaders in an attempt to fight this radicalism on multiple fronts to include military, intelligence, societal, etc. sadly, we don't have a strong leader.

Trump has an awesome plan, the best plan you have ever seen

 

[Bazza]

Trump has an awesome plan, the best plan you have ever seen

I'd wager he could get the job done better than who we have in place now.

 

[Tidewater]

A lot of high emotions. My observations:
1. We cannot give in to hating all muslims. There are a billion of them and we need the good muslims to help kill the bad muslims. (Definition of "good muslim" is one that is helping us kill the bad ones).
2. Just because we don't hate all muslims, does not mean we need a lot of muslims immigrating to the US just now. I'd limit legal immigration from muslim majority countries to a handful per year (like six/country). Maybe in 50 years or a century, muslims generally will grow up enough to make it safe to allow some to immigrate. Not now.
3. The US can be a world leader in this fight. In the film Braveheart, William Wallace tells Robert the Bruce, "If you will just lead them, they would follow you!" That pretty much sums it up. I wish the president was not so squeamish about American leadership and American power. A strong and active America is not a bad thing. And taking a knee to run out the clock won't work.
4. The young, military aged men from Syria headed to Europe and hiding behind their women and children need to be faced right about and sent home to liberate their country. In any case, if allowed to emigrate to Europe of the US, such material makes for very poor citizens.
5. This cannot be a military-only operation. It will require the military, and the intelligence services (infiltrating ISIS and other similar organizations, see bullet number 1 above), diplomats, financial experts, information ops, law enforcement, all integrated in a plan.

 

[CB4]

And for those on the left that believe if we simply "quit fighting with them, quit bombing and leave the Middle East it will end' are delusional. This is an extreme religious ideology. It doesn't end at the borders of Syria or Iraq. The battle must be fought and won there. And it needs to be fought by a strong coalition of Middle Eastern nations supported by the west. If we don't, we will fight it here more and more often. Much the same as with Axis powers of WWII where it was the goal to unite under Nazism or Imperialistic Japan, the goal is to unite under a radical Islamic ideology and destroy the west.

So if all western influence pulls out of the Middle East and leave it to them to "sort it out", what happens? The radical Muslim ideology is clear: Convert or die. The ethnic and religious cleansing that will take place will make Bosnia look like a church social. Christian, Jews, and yes, even "moderate" Muslims that don't share their ideology will be murdered in untold numbers.

We need to recognize this is a global war, not just isolated to a few countries in the Middle East.

 

[ValuJet]

I hope whoever takes the lead in this fight - and it appears it will not be the US, will take the approach that winning over hearts and minds won't work.

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

I agree with your sentiments Bazza in the sense that it is a culture war. And until the peaceful Muslims stand up against the extreme factions, it will not end. And there in lies the problem. I have friends, neighbors and co-workers that are Muslim. And they are good people. But the strange thing is that when the senseless murders of innocent people takes place like last night, for the most part they go mute. They will say it is awful, but I am yet to here a single one of them condemn the extreme, violently radicalized sect of THEIR religion.

I used to believe that the statement "The difference between a moderate Muslim and radical Muslim is simple. A radical Muslim wants to kill you. The moderate Muslim wants the radical Muslim kill you." was ignorant and absurd. However, I'm reaching the point where I'm beginning to believe there is some truth in that statement.

The silence of my Muslim neighbors and colleagues when these acts happen are deafening. And like other atrocities, you're are complicit by your silence and inactions.

We have hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees fleeing Syria because they fear that very faction of their own religion. Do me favor. Stop running and turn around and fight. Isolate that sect of your religion that has become a disease and eliminate them. That sect of your religion is a cancer and it has metastasized to the rest of world.

And if you don't believe there are those Muslims living and working here that have extreme views of non Muslims, you are sadly mistaken. I have worked with some (and believe it or not mostly highly educated with degrees from schools in the US, France, England, Germany, etc.) with views so extreme, given the right set of circumstances, I believe they could become violently radicalized in a heart beat.

That's the scary put. That potential to be seen here in the States would be catastrophic because nobody would see it coming. They think they these are just refugees. That's false. These people fleeing have an ideology too.


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[Timberline Tide]

 

[dvldog]

Wow. Makes you think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bama2112]

A strong US leader would gather world leaders in an attempt to fight this radicalism on multiple fronts to include military, intelligence, societal, etc. sadly, we don't have a strong leader.

I agree

 

[bama2112]

A lot of high emotions. My observations:
1. We cannot give in to hating all muslims. There are a billion of them and we need the good muslims to help kill the bad muslims. (Definition of "good muslim" is one that is helping us kill the bad ones).
2. Just because we don't hate all muslims, does not mean we need a lot of muslims immigrating to the US just now. I'd limit legal immigration from muslim majority countries to a handful per year (like six/country). Maybe in 50 years or a century, muslims generally will grow up enough to make it safe to allow some to immigrate. Not now.
3. The US can be a world leader in this fight. In the film Braveheart, William Wallace tells Robert the Bruce, "If you will just lead them, they would follow you!" That pretty much sums it up. I wish the president was not so squeamish about American leadership and American power. A strong and active America is not a bad thing. And taking a knee to run out the clock won't work.
4. The young, military aged men from Syria headed to Europe and hiding behind their women and children need to be faced right about and sent home to liberate their country. In any case, if allowed to emigrate to Europe of the US, such material makes for very poor citizens.
5. This cannot be a military-only operation. It will require the military, and the intelligence services (infiltrating ISIS and other similar organizations, see bullet number 1 above), diplomats, financial experts, information ops, law enforcement, all integrated in a plan.

This is a C/P for Wikipedia. Seems like Paris and London need to control their population of Muslims.
The French capital of Paris and its metropolitan area has the largest number (up to 1.7 million according to The Economist)[SUP][7][/SUP] of Muslims than any other city in the European Union.London also has a substantial community of Muslim origin, numbering about 1 million within the limits of Greater London and exceeding this figure when the entire metropolitan area is taken into account.

 

[81usaf92]

And for those on the left that believe if we simply "quit fighting with them, quit bombing and leave the Middle East it will end' are delusional. This is an extreme religious ideology. It doesn't end at the borders of Syria or Iraq. The battle must be fought and won there. And it needs to be fought by a strong coalition of Middle Eastern nations supported by the west. If we don't, we will fight it here more and more often. Much the same as with Axis powers of WWII where it was the goal to unite under Nazism or Imperialistic Japan, the goal is to unite under a radical Islamic ideology and destroy the west.

So if all western influence pulls out of the Middle East and leave it to them to "sort it out", what happens? The radical Muslim ideology is clear: Convert or die. The ethnic and religious cleansing that will take place will make Bosnia look like a church social. Christian, Jews, and yes, even "moderate" Muslims that don't share their ideology will be murdered in untold numbers.

We need to recognize this is a global war, not just isolated to a few countries in the Middle East.

I'll agree that doing nothing won't solve anything and winning or losing in Syria is not the end all be all in the conflict. But Syria is more important than practically any other conflict that we have faced in recent history. Isis's end game is to unite the Muslim world against the west. There is a belief that a conflict in Syria would start this. It is probably best to significantly fund Assad to do away with the pathetic resistance and put an end to Isis because Isis is just as much his enemy as ours.

I don't think boots on the ground is going to solve it at this point. The best time for that was in 2013 when Assad used chemical weapons, but now it's just a forgotten footnote in history and it makes backing a tyrant seem to be the best choice in a no win situation.

 

[Timberline Tide]

Let's see:

Paris ISIS Terrorist Registered as ‘REFUGEE’

and

[URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-refugees-u-s-centres-1.3308576"]Obama moves to 'increase and accelerate' admission of Syrian refugees...[/URL]


what could go wrong ?

 

[Cleburne]

Dang this climate change, it's making killers out of a peaceful religion.

 

[lazlohollyfeld]

The California band, "Eagles of Death Metal," that was scheduled to play at the theater where most of the killings happened, are not among the injured. They are safe, apparently.
I don't know why this struck me as odd. Amid all the carnage, a band called "Eagles of Death Metal" are okay.

Their name is meant to be a bit sarcastic. Still, I doubt the Imam's would be ok with the Eagles of Death Metal discography.

 

[Tidewater]

Let's see:

Paris ISIS Terrorist Registered as ‘REFUGEE’

and

[URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-refugees-u-s-centres-1.3308576"]Obama moves to 'increase and accelerate' admission of Syrian refugees...[/URL]


what could go wrong ?

And Salon dutifully adds its own moral obtuseness.
Our terrorism double standard: After Paris, let’s stop blaming Muslims and take a hard look at ourselves.
Not only does Salon engage in the "blame the victims," they use some maladroit sleight of hand statistics to justify this strange belief.

I looked into the article and found this, the ironically-named "Loonwatch" report FBI data starting from 1980 to 2005 (exactly how relevant is data in 1980 to the islamic terror phenomenon?), and concludes that 42% of terrorist attacks in the US during that time period were conducted by Hispanic terrorist groups (What? When was the last time you heard about Hispanic terrorism?) 24% by extreme left-wing groups (?), 7% by Jewish extremists and 6% by Communists.

Europol provides similar data. I guess if a guy yells "Allahu akbar, and unloads his pistol into a crowd of soldiers, twice, and the executive authority calls that "workplace violence," then of course the data on islamic terrorism is going to get skewed.

My point is caveat lector.

 

[Tidewater]

Rob Lowe awkward tweets
Think twice, especally when tweeting about terrorism.

Rob Lowe tweeted, after Hollande's speech, "Oh, NOW France closes its borders."
Indelicate, to say the least. Probably should have thought twice before posting that one.

 

[dvldog]

Just heard on CBS that one of the attackers came in through Greece less than a month ago under the amnesty program


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[selmaborntidefan]

You all do realize that sometime in the next 48 hours, some idiot is going to try and make this George W Bush's fault, don't you?

(speaking of which - could this not be a burden for a certain former Secretary of State running for the White House?)

 

[Tide1986]

Rob Lowe awkward tweets
Think twice, especally when tweeting about terrorism.

Rob Lowe tweeted, after Hollande's speech, "Oh, NOW France closes its borders."
Indelicate, to say the least. Probably should have thought twice before posting that one.

Indelicate though it may be, the tweet simply voices what most rational people are currently thinking.

 

[Bama Reb]

Rob Lowe awkward tweets
Think twice, especally when tweeting about terrorism.

Rob Lowe tweeted, after Hollande's speech, "Oh, NOW France closes its borders."
Indelicate, to say the least. Probably should have thought twice before posting that one.

A bit indelicate, perhaps. But truthful nonetheless. It's about time we quit being more concerned with the sound of a message than the accuracy of it's context.