CNN now reports 153 dead. MSNBC reports "at least" 120. Fox News reports 158.

i understand that the terrorists had guns, but they killed over 110 people at the concert hall, 4 of them.

where is the will to survive? at what point when they are systematically killing people do you decide to try to do something about it? that cant be an american only mentality. it cant be.

im sure more details will surface, and im sure there were pockets of heroism throughout the attack, but man. 110+ killed by 4 people...

French people don t have 1.something guns/citizen. Asking heroism from who? Imagine yourself infront of 4 automatic fire weapons and bomb belts. If you somehow drible his automatic weapon, you'll die by explosion.are you that brave mr ford? I highly doubt. The only people able to do this are trained soldiers. And a large portion of soldiers won t go into a suicide mission.

stop being you for one moment.

there are many stories of people fighting back during terrorist attacks. you dont have to have a gun to fight back, and i even acknowledged that fact in my post. if my choice is to die on my knees, or die on my feet, im going to choose feet. you would be surprised what humans can do when backed into a corner. i have actually been there (metaphorically dude), and it got me stabbed. i didnt have 100 people with me either. i chose to fight.

look, i dont pretend to know what exactly happened, but if they really were systematically executing people, it is surprising if no one tried anything.

France said they are going to be "ruthless" in their response.

they already had their only carrier on the way. the only European carrier actually.

France sent troops to Afghanistan after 9/11. the US will more than likely back France at whatever they want. Could mean ground forces.

Well i don t either. I am sure, things will be more clear in the next days.

But i guess that in the theater they came in with automatics. Panic, runnig for life, not thinking straight. Fear is normal for a human been, even a trained unarmed us seal will run for cover.

I doubt it was systematic. It was more like come in shoot at everything it moves.

fluff Ashlynn.

man, i had almost forgotten about that scam artist!

Mind explaining that train attack recently?

Murica

people need to stop republican conservative white christians from doing these things. the scum of the fluffing earth.

also lets ban 9/11 remembrance.

Really, is remembering such a good thing?

THAT'S A GOOD POINT, ALIN.

FRANCE HAS VERY RESTRICTIVE GUN LAWS..................

....................


........................

https://en.wikipedia.org/...well_Center_attack#Attack


they were armed with 3 assault rifles, pistols, explosives, and hundreds of rounds of ammo.

pinned down by a traffic cop and a pistol.

ALL ABOARD!

This thread is better.

What is needed here is a rapid urban renewal crew with the full boat of materials to level the "playing field" a bit. Just start nuking the fluff out of places from where these terrorists come, and voila, they will stop coming. It's not that hard, just lay waste to the areas that produce these people, and then, they won't be producing any more terroristic people.

Simple math wins

Ignore things like fallout, risk of escalation, and exacerbated hatred from the survivors.

Nuking will not help matters...will only create more hate. The ideals are global and not just confined to one particular area of the world

In order to win this conflict, we're going to have to push Saudi Arabia to start respecting human rights. We have to push for the protection of women, Christians, and other minorities. We need to tell Saudi Arabia that they are not our biggest problem in the Middle East, for the moment, but when that changes they can either have evolved to a civilized society or they can be treated as the biggest problem.

As one Muslim on Fox News said, this must be as much a political fight as it is a military fight and the political fight must be led by free Muslims that love western liberties and the countries they live in against theocratic Muslims. As more and more free Muslims stand up, we must give them the backing of freedom loving peoples everywhere.

such a dumbass comment

but after your NATO comment i shouldn't have expected anything else from you.

We don't live in a fantasy land of daisies and sunshine. When people start understanding that acting on an extremist ideology is a quick ticket to jail or to hell, they'll start rethinking their actions. Until then, extremist ideologies will continue to exist and these people will continue to murder, rape, assault, burn and commit every other crime against humanity. People change when they are faced with no other choice. We can either fight the problem or we can allow it to continue to fester. Kill the extremists and let the free Muslims thrive.

How do you propose we solve this problem?

the threat of jail or hell is not a deterrent to jihadists....

most of the people are living in their own form of hell to start with.

the only way to solve the problem is to improve the quality of life for people and dispel myths perpetuated by jihadist recruiters. if they are fat and happy they wont run around killing people. it is the american way.

You cannot make way for political reforms to restore prosperity when extremists are killing people in the streets. You will not convince free Muslims to speak out against theocratic Muslims when they do not feel the support of the world. Why would they stick their heads out when we're not willing to stick our heads out.

If you want to dry up ISIS recruiting, then you better be prepared to make them look like they don't know what they're doing. This is a group that, recognized or not, has set up a country. For as long as we allow them to have territory like that, they'll be able to easily recruit young, impressionable people.

We need to fight militarily where we have clear targets and fight organized crime where the battlefields aren't quite as clear. Only then will people get a chance to create peace and prosperity.


Back to Trife: After 9/11, NATO declared Article 5 to be activated. Terrorists may not be the treaty's intended target, but (make no mistake about it) they are a military target first and foremost. NATO having France's back in responding is about sending a clear message of zero tolerance for these types of attacks.

Are you a Fox News bot by any chance? How many wars have you fought? Have you ever battled Islamic extremism? I would bet the answer is no...

Good news the refugees whole heartedly condemned the paris attacks.

Love everyone except white people and the west.

ive seen a video in lebanon where the citizens stopped the guy from detonating his belt bomb . but not sure in this situation when they have automatic rifles aiming at you

Breaking news: Humans are completely bonkers!

A couple of despicable humans have commited an unprovoked attack against several random humans that were just going about their daily lives. Several humans and humans very close to them have come to legitimate, grievious harm due to this.
The other humans around them don't give a damn about that though, instead they lash out at random and unrelated things they don't like, and demand that grievious harm be done to other random unrelated humans they don't like in retaliation.

France is presently bombing Syria.

Interesting that France calls this "An Act Of War"
And they may activate the NATO mutual defense clause.

Looks like someone may actually LEAD a serious destruction of ISIS.

And once we get rid of the bastards destroying things we need to be serious about changing the culture there enough to accept actual social and economic reform to build a real country lead by a strong middle class -- because middle class people are the most against wars.

No. There will be some saber rattling and some tough talk. Then some quiet terrorist fluff sucking behind the scenes to find out what they can do to make the terrorists happy so they wont attack anymore.
Rince and repeat.

The point of this whole line of reasoning is pretty simple, actually.

You're in this situation, and you are going to die, not, you "might" die, but you are "going" to die, why not take at least one of the suckers with you, right? You have nothing to lose, and maybe everything to gain.

I can't believe you don't get that.

I get that. i get what you/mrford means. How many were in that situation, out of the ones that are posting here? ( easy to be brave on internet forums). Panic almost freez half of the civis. You are unable to even move in situation like that if you do not have basic military training ( police, jamdarmey ).

Getting one fluff with you, means aproaching a bomb belt AK47 brainwashed person. I doubt even US navy will do that, empty handed.

The discussion is kinda pointless. Asking from civils to take action in the "theater" scenario is not a logic question.

Just because you were raised to be a coward doesn't mean everyone else is.

People fight back all the time. It is in the news every other week.

Around the clock saturation bombing will at least feel good, and coming from the Bomber groups not these 1 bomb strike fighters. Make Ar-raqqah look like a 43' stalingrad. or atleast 45' Dresden

Don't think we have used strategic bombing since Tora Bora and even then we tossed a bunch of dirt and made a few mountians shorter. A far cry from what you are calling for on cities.

But B-1Bs have been used as smart bomb busses. One plane can take out dozens of targets.

The western world can no longer stomach strategic bombing and mass casualties. Winning is harder when you play with a set of rules.

How about:

1) Stop supporting dictators that oppress their own people (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, to name a few).

2) Stop supporting a colonial power that can do just fine on its own (Israel).

3) Stop supporting one faction over another (Sunnis vs Shias), or creating them (Mujahideen/Al-Qaeda).

4) Stop sanctioning countries that lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands (Iraq).

5) Stop bombing dictators and creating power vacuums (leading to the rise of ISIL in Iraq).

Basically, if the USA would just mind its own fluffing business in the Middle East, you might actually get somewhere in solving this "problem" instead of trying to drop bombs on ideas.

Lol. Dropping bombs on ideas. Like the oppression of women. The rape of boys. The killing of people that reject the actual word of the quran dictated by extremists. The slaughter of innocent civilians in advanced peaceful countries. Millions of migrants are surely fleeing because of some fluffs ideas.
I think how the usa government forced the mormon church to conform the same should be done to muslims. Destroy their communities where ever they pop up. Drive them away by force and death. Kill their leaders. Drive them to unwanted worthless lands as they are forced to gather as a group. Then confront them militarily and end it with a choice to live in peace and play by rules or die.

That's funny Heston, because that's exactly what the USA is doing in the Middle East. And look at all the cool benefits we've reaped.

You probably have no ideea what 4 ak47 shooting your direction looks like. If you think brave people own a unlimited number of guns, than you are the bravest in the world.

I repeat, so maybe you will understand: 4 bomb belt terorrists enter the theater shooting ak47 in all direction. I wonder in what fantasy world of yours,, someone could aproach that. Besides chuck norris...

I am coward because i tell you people panic. Go watch some documentaries and read some books to see how people react in crissis situation. More than 60% panic and freez being pined down.

No, its not. You would be packing your bags to head back to Palestine and islam would be made a crime punishable by death in the usa. We are far from that confrontation today. Not even close actually.

Heston, you said this:



That is EXACTLY what is happening in the MIDDLE EAST, not here. Read more closely.

Whatever my brother. I know you and i think the same about isis or extremeism. Thats good enough for me.

This may be responding to old posts in a thread that has long since moved on, but I do not understand the derision surrounding the NATO comment - especially in light of France triggering article 42.7 of the EU Treaty, requiring "aid and assistance by all the means in their power" to help a member state which is "victim of armed aggression on its territory"

that is fine that you lean towards flight, but dont use that as justification to say everyone does. im sure stories of people fighting back in this very attack will come to light.

how many guns i own or do not own has nothing to do with this. the fact that you bring that up shows how little faith you apparently have in the strength of your point so you deflect. well played.

the funny part is that you bring that up like it is an insult, but i guarantee that if this attack had happened where there are less gun restrictions, the attack would have gone down much differently. thanks for pointing that out for me. look up what happened last time explosive and AK-47 wielding dirka dirkas tried to attack texas.

https://plus.google.com/...nZunger/posts/RN2yx54bxPa

People just have to get it through their heads that Islamic Fundamentalists are NOT going to integrate with your great utopian society, that is NOT going to happen, no way, no how.

So, you are faced with a problem. How to live your life the way you want to, and not have crazy, illiterate, stupid people who believe in Jihad, come to your country and kill your people. The answer for this problem is right in front of us, only all of you "sheeple" are too scared to talk about it. Some moron might accuse you of being an "Islamophobe, or a Racist", or some other buzzword designed to shut you up.

Well, where I live is STILL American, and it will remain that way, until some moron who happens to have enough firepower can come and take our weapons from us.

I propose that we "pre-empt" all of that, and just start blowing them to kingdom come straight up.

Quit mincing around like fairies and turn up the heat. Trust me, if they want to live, they'll adapt, or they'll become extinct, it's happened before, and it can happen again.

Just requires some balls and some will power.

1) I would stop supporting Saudi Arabia if the reality on the ground in the Middle East were a little different. Sadly, supporting one bad actor is a primary way of containing a worse actor in the Middle East right now. For the time being, I would pressure Saudi Arabia as much as possible to liberalize their country and would flat out demand that they shut down the religious schools that are creating jihadists.

Not sure how you can call Jordan an oppressive dictatorship. While the King of Jordan does hold significant power, they seem pretty far from a dictatorship in the class sense. The treatment in politics of women and Christians is an example of that should be held up for the rest of the Middle East. Frankly, they're one of the few Middle Eastern countries that deserves significant support.

In Egypt, we have a military that is friendly to the US/Israel. We have a military that seems intent on keeping Egypt headed in a path towards a Jordan-like future. We have also had an idiotic constitutional process which held elections for a government and then wrote the constitution. Really? Have we learned nothing from history? First comes writing the constitution. Second comes ratifying the constitution by super-majority. Then and only then do you elect the government to operate under the terms and restrictions of the country's constitution. The Military toppling Morsi was not the military toppling a properly elected leader; no the Muslim Brotherhood wrote the constitution for the Muslim Brotherhood, not all Egyptians. Agree or disagree with the military's power in Egypt, the serve to balance the country. Right now the Egyptian government is fighting and facing opposition that would suppress other Egyptians most basic rights.

2) Israel has unilaterally pulled back from Palestinian areas numerous times. It has only bought them more death. The only time Israel has gotten the peace they asked for in exchange for the land they held was when they made peace with Egypt. If the world wants to solve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, then the world needs to sit the Palestinians down and tell them how it has to be. Until the world is willing to see Palestinians equally the perpetrators of violence as the world is willing to see them as the victims of oppression, we are unlikely to get anywhere. When the rest of the world stops the violence towards Israel, then the US could find the political will to bring Israel along in the peace process. For now, however, Israel will continue to expand their settlements because they have never gained peace by stopping or reversing settlements. Bottom line, Israel has a right to exist in peace on much of the land they occupy. Modern Israel is not now, nor have they ever been a colonial power; what they have been is the victim of near continuous aggression from their neighbors.

3) I actually agree with this position, mostly. The Kurds deserve US support because they have by and large supported our interests for decades. Other organizations should be supported on a common interests basis. I don't think we should take sides in sectarian conflicts, but the US should recognize when one side or the other has taken sides against the US.

4) I suppose that Kuwait deserved to be invaded or that the Shiites/Kurds deserved to be gassed. You know what we actually should have done? We should have finished the job the first time; that's the lesson we can take from Iraq.

5) Let's not pretend that some of these dictators didn't create their own instability. Saddam Hussein was a destabilizing agent in the Middle East. The only good he did was keep Iran in check and by the time he was taken out, even that was on shaky ground. To be honest, I am not certain that Iraq can really exist as a country in the long-term. In hindsight, the US probably should have tried to use Iraq to solve Turkey's conflict with their Kurdish population (vis a vis a United Kingdom devolution style solution), induced Syria to friendlier relations, and enticed Iran to the negotiating table. In short, the US should have invaded Iraq with the intention breaking the country apart. We should have taken care of the peoples in Iraq instead of trying to preserve the nation.

I would not have supported the fall of Hosni Mubarak, but would have moved to ensure a far more orderly and proper constitutional process after he fell. In Libya, there was likely very little the US or anyone could have done through action or inaction to effect the long-term outcome of their Civil War. Dictatorships are, by their own nature, unstable governments.

All this being said, I'm not about to support removing the House of Saud from power in Saudi Arabia, even as I support pressuring them to modernize/liberalize.

The Middle East has plenty of problems that would exist with or without a US presence. While their are many situations, particularly when conflicts are staying contained to the areas involved that the US should mind our own business, there are also situations where innocent countries have been attacked or where the US has legitimate interests at play. Let's not pretend that all the bad (or even a majority of the bad) situations in the Middle East are caused by the US. The Middle East is a conflict rich part of the world all on its own.