Explosion near Stadium in Paris, multiple shootings and hostage taking...

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It's not just about Islam, though that's part of it. It's not just about anti-Western politics, though that's part of it. It's not even just about Islam and colonialism - if it were, why doesn't Indonesia foster violent radicalism? The third element is the honour-bound warrior culture of the conservative Middle East.

So think of it as a venn diagram. One circle is Islam. One circle is failed post-colonial states that lack civil institutions. The third is fiercely anti-modern honour culture. Where those circles overlap you have rich soil for jihadists.

At its heart, this is a furious reaction against modernity. Against liberal notions of rationalism, individual freedom, and the rights of women. Given how many young men in the Middle East are far more conservative than the most dyed-in-the-wool 70-year-old racist in the American South, and how dire the economic prospects are for parts of the world where women essentially are shut out of public life and where innovation and entrepreneurship are negligible, this isn't going to go away any time soon.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings

[Canuck-Hater]

Paris: What We Know Right Now http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w..._medium=social

[Drak]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

We are their enemy not because of what we do, but because of who we are, and because of the ideals and values we hold. Playing the humanitarian role will make us no less a target.

Agreed - who we are. Decades of imperialism and interventionism create instability, a major part of the problem.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by T@T

Doing some searching:

USA
Canada
Russia
Germany
Japan
Great Britain
Brazil
Sweden
Finland
Australia
India
Malaysia
Mexico
Turkey
Argentina
Italy
Poland

Countries whose leaders have posted condolences to France on the tragic events.

Two Muslim countries and only one anywhere near the middle east...sad.

This is a result of your personal search engine bubble and western media bias in general. It's really sad that this is how the world is today. Unless you regurarly follow news from outside your comfort zone, they will eventually be so well hidden from you that it's very natural to think that they don't even exist.

As far as I've seen, pretty much everyone in the Middle-East has condemned these attacks.

Iran was actually about the first country anywhere to react (which is unusual as they are usually slow to react to anything).

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt have all condemned them.

Couldn't find a quote from Hezbollah as they have closed their official English website, but they condemded the Charlie Hebdo attacks so you can tell where they stand. (If you knew their politics this would be clear anyway, but I'm not going to rail on people for believing that Hezbollah is a bunch of terrorists too. Middle-East is complicated.) In any case I'm certain there's a statement out there already and I just can't find it because it's in Arabic.

Kurdistan Regional Government unsurprisingly has expressed their solidary and promised to keep fighting a common enemy.

Syria's Assad has pretty clearly also condemned the attacks, but some of his comments might not be very popular in the West.

Wrong [policies] adopted by Western states, particularly France, toward events in the region, and its ignorance of the support of a number of its allies to terrorists are reasons behind the expansion of terrorism

Reading between the lines, he's pretty much saying that "you used to fund these guys that have attacked you, so they could attack me". Which is a defendable position, although as far as I know it's not exactly true.

(Personally I do agree though that the West has truly and completely effed up in the Middle-East (yet again), and ended up fueling ISIS as a result. Then again if the Russians would not have backed Assad in the early stages of the presidency, it's perfectly possible that Syria would now be relatively calm and not a breeding ground for terrorism.)

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

Not because of what we do? We created many of these lunatics. We killed their leaders and they put in crazier #######s than they previously had. We blew up their loved ones and they swore vengeance. They murder our loved ones and we declare war. It is a vicious cycle that we are in and we should be trying to stop the cycle not kill more of "them" so that we create whole new generations of madmen.

I'd like the killing to stop now please.

Western foreign policy has helped create this mess, yes.

Considering the state of the conflict/climate RIGHT NOW, pulling up stakes and walking away makes us no less a target.

The forward progress of their caliphate isn't dependant on if we are good guys or not.

Laying low and playing possum with a ideological enemy, who employs in guerrilla tactics isn't going to get us anywhere.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

We are their enemy not because of what we do, but because of who we are, and because of the ideals and values we humanitarian role will make us no less a target.

Precisely. Which is why willy nilly incorporation of refugees is such a dangerous game to play by Trudeau.

It isn't exactly a stretch to believe that with a limited vetting process on 25,000 people in the next 2 months, a handful of radicals will mix in with the legitimate requests and literally be met with open arms. That should be frightening to every Canadian, no matter what their political stripes.

Here are their own words on why they attacked Paris last night.

An online statement said eight militants armed with explosive belts and automatic weapons attacked carefully chosen targets in the “capital of adultery and vice,” including a soccer stadium where France was playing Germany, and the Bataclan concert hall, where an American rock band was playing, and “hundreds of apostates were attending an adulterous party.”

“The stench of death will not leave their noses as long as they remain at the forefront of the Crusaders’ campaign, dare to curse our prophet, boast of a war on Islam in France, and strike Muslims in the lands of the caliphate with warplanes that were of no use to them in the streets and rotten alleys of Paris,” it said.

Scum of the earth people who only understand one way in confrontation.

To think Canada, or any Western democracy, shouldn't engage them at their level is obscenely naïve. These guys don't speak diplomatic language and never ever will as they have zero interest in peace.

Time for NATO (and Canada as a full member) to craft a strategy and come together to go after this group and annihilate them once and for all. Time for the rubber to meet the road so to speak.

No one wants the ugliness of war and the associated toll it will take, but sometimes the right choice is the painful one.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Precisely. Which is why willy nilly incorporation of refugees is such a dangerous game to play by Trudeau.

It isn't exactly a stretch to believe that with a limited vetting process on 25,000 people in the next 2 months, a handful of radicals will mix in with the legitimate requests and literally be met with open arms. That should be frightening to every Canadian, no matter what their political stripes.

Here are their own words on why they attacked Paris last night.



Scum of the earth people who only understand one way in confrontation.

To think Canada, or any Western democracy, shouldn't engage them at their level is obscenely naïve. These guys don't speak diplomatic language and never ever will as they have zero interest in peace.

Time for NATO (and Canada as a full member) to craft a strategy and come together to go after this group and annihilate them once and for all. Time for the rubber to meet the road so to speak.

No one wants the ugliness of war and the associated toll it will take, but sometimes the right choice is the painful one.

I sort of agree, if I am recalling correctly at the beginning stages of WW2 Great Britain seemed to take a fairly long wait and see approach before finally engaging the Nazi's in war, no? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here. At some point I think it's probable that the best course of action is to engage and fight.

But what are your thoughts on the (IMO) very valid criticism of the strategy that engaging in warfare only breeds more of these people and problems and entrenches the hate even more?

[2Stonedbirds]

Agreed transplant99.

I'm all for bringing refugees to Canada and helping distressed and displaced Syrians, however the lack of time to as you say, properly vett these people and ensure they are who they are should be extremely concerning to all Canadians.

Opening a back door for radicals to enter our country and set up shop here isn't very appealing to me. They need to be properly screened.

[normtwofinger]

Pull out and sever all ties. Somehow block all communications to the outside world, block their access to the Internet, no travel allowed outside the region. Ditch Saudi oil (probably not possible). Any foreign ISIS members who are be proven to be so get air dropped into the middle east as a sentence. Let them kill each other.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Showing countries effected by cruel insurgents that Canada will provide care first but will DEFEND them when they fall under attack is a powerful tool to help curb radicalization.

Edit: If we have learned anything about the U.S.A led war on terrisiom is being consistently on the offensive leads to more civilian casualties then it soes to terrorist deaths. That in turn inspires more radicalization against weastern countries then just a mere words alone do. It figuratively gives those words a face to go with the name.

Canada is now part of the grey zone ISIS talks about. Given what I understand to be their ideology /mission, I'm not sure it that makes Canada more or less a target. This is a different animal, I think.

In February this year, in a chilling editorial in its propaganda magazine, Dabiq, Isis laid out its own strategy to eliminate what the writer, or writers, called “the grey zone”.
This was, Isis said, what lay between belief and unbelief, good and evil, the righteous and the damned. It was home, too, to all those who had yet to commit to the forces of either side.
The grey zone, Isis claimed, had been “critically endangered [since] the blessed operations of September 11th”, as “these operations showed the world” the two camps that mankind must choose between.
Over the years, since successive violent acts had narrowed the grey zone to the point where by the end of 2014 “the time had come for another event to ... bring division to the world and destroy the grey zone everywhere”.

I understand there will be as much opinion as "fact" written over the next few days. I expect most pieces will contain some of each. An interesting, chilling read
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-paris-attacks

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I sort of agree, if I am recalling correctly at the beginning stages of WW2 Great Britain seemed to take a fairly long wait and see approach before finally engaging the Nazi's in war, no? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here. At some point I think it's probable that the best course of action is to engage and fight.

But what are your thoughts on the (IMO) very valid criticism of the strategy that engaging in warfare only breeds more of these people and problems and entrenches the hate even more?

yeah, its entirely valid. The problem though, is that not engaging them and trying to destroy them, makes them even stronger moving forward....much moreso than leaving them to their own devices.

I think a legitimate question is...at this point would the average Syrian (particularly those being deployed around the globe as refugees right now) object to a world wide and united armed force going into their country
and setting up shop to eliminate not only ISIS but Assad as well?

I think the answer would be heavily in favor of it myself, but perhaps I'm wrong.

[Itse]

Btw, in the Middle-East they are probably talking more about the major terrorist attack that happened in Beirut just a day before Paris. 43 people killed in two suicide bombings, with a third guy captured before he could strike. That attack was also related to ISIS.

We are quite literally all in the same boat here.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

We are their enemy not because of what we do, but because of who we are, and because of the ideals and values we hold. Playing the humanitarian role will make us no less a target.

They hate us for our freedoms.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

They hate us for our freedoms.

They hate everyone. It's not just us.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...eirut-bombings

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Itse

Btw, in the Middle-East they are probably talking more about the major terrorist attack that happened in Beirut just a day before Paris. 43 people killed in two suicide bombings, with a third guy captured before he could strike. That attack was also related to ISIS.

We are quite literally all in the same boat here.

There have been an estimated 170,000 people killed by ISIS in Iraq.
To suggest anything to do with them is limited to 'hating us' is entirely incorrect.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

They hate us for our freedoms.

When they gloat on about a worldwide caliphate and everyone living under the thumb of sharia law, it would appear to be so.

Of course, its not that simple but where the west will fight or impose war based on material need, theirs is one of ideology.

I don't know how you defeat a enemy that is willing to wrap themselves up in explosives, go into a crowded public area and murder hundreds of innocent people but I'm guessing pacifism isn't the answer.

Our new PM is in a bit of a precarious situation as he never wanted to be in Syria, yet backing out, especially now, makes us look like a poor ally.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Precisely. Which is why willy nilly incorporation of refugees is such a dangerous game to play by Trudeau.

It isn't exactly a stretch to believe that with a limited vetting process on 25,000 people in the next 2 months, a handful of radicals will mix in with the legitimate requests and literally be met with open arms. That should be frightening to every Canadian, no matter what their political stripes.

Here are their own words on why they attacked Paris last night.



Scum of the earth people who only understand one way in confrontation.

To think Canada, or any Western democracy, shouldn't engage them at their level is obscenely naïve. These guys don't speak diplomatic language and never ever will as they have zero interest in peace.

Time for NATO (and Canada as a full member) to craft a strategy and come together to go after this group and annihilate them once and for all. Time for the rubber to meet the road so to speak.

No one wants the ugliness of war and the associated toll it will take, but sometimes the right choice is the painful one.

They've been trying to do this for decades, the only result is that next generation increases their hatred and radicalism. Groups like IS are symptoms of bigger problems and trying to stamp them out only renews a cycle of violence and hatred that is already spiraling out of control. Kill every member of IS and 5-10 years down the road something worse will replace them.

[calgaryblood]

Has there been any links to refugees who entered France?

[robaur]

So what is the response to those that say US and its allies are part of the problem that go into countries where they shouldn't go and cause instability which leads to the rise of groups such as ISIS. Even going to say that US/CIA is mostly the culprit of supplying weapons, money and arms to these terror organizations in the beginning through back channels and then these organizations get out of their control.

I really don't know how much of that is true or not...but I guess it deserves some thought.

Maybe western governments should just stop meddling in the affairs of the middle east and let them kill each other over it? At this point, I'm at a loss for a solution.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Has there been any links to refugees who entered France?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ttacks-killers

A Syrian who apparently passed through Greece as a refugee last month, a known French extremist and an Egyptian were said to be among a cell of eight Islamist gunmen who killed nearly 130 people in a bloody wave of suicide bombings and shootings that left France reeling


Paris attacks: Isis militant said to be Syrian who passed through Greece on refugee route – live