Paris: Dozens Killed In Terrorist Attack

[GenesisNemesis]

Why do some people focus on "US Intervention in the Middle East" as a way to justify this horrible act?

Protip: no one's justifying the act. They're merely looking at the causes. There's a clear difference.

 

[barbos]

Not thinking of body/missile ratio.

http://www.newsweek.com/november-dr...en-children-reportedly-killed-pakistan-288448

In the six attempts it took to kill Qari Hussain, for example, 128 people were killed, including 13 children.

They were trying to kill a terrorist, and how many of these 128 were terrorists, just with different from "Qari Hussain" name?

How many were innocent?

128 minus terrorists.

 

[maxparrish]

Bottom Line is when pigs fly...

I am baffled at the weenie posturing and whiny responses, the trembling and shaking at the very thought of the targets of terrorism standing on their legs and violently resisting.

You start by picturing the other side as consisting of people who are as sincere as we are, instead of a pack of devils. Unless...

My moral imagination is insufficient to laud their sincerity in the beheading of groups of children, or their crucifixion. My moral imagination can't embrace the idea that groups of people, including women and children, are routinely executed for the crimes of "refusing to fast", "blasphemy", and "practicing magic".

They are the embodiment of pure evil - an evil equal to the "sincere" executioners of the SS.

So how is it that ISIS apologist liberals worry so much about the sincerity of evil? Seriously?

Granted, this comports with ISIS desires...but I am assuming you (and others) are not ISIS fellow-travelers...or am I incorrect?

Incorrect. IS wishes to provoke conflict. They are as contemptuous of weenie posturing and whiny responses as you are. The biggest threat to them is widespread Islam of a more tolerant nature.

I agree, they do wish to provoke conflict. And as long as the West does little, they are going to keep provoking with murderous terrorism. As they are always more than happy to slaughter in the City of Lights, I would suggest that the French seriously take the war to them. Make them focus their energy on defense.

But perhaps you suggest the French beg them for their list of demands, crawl like supine rodents, and comply?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

So how is it that ISIS apologist liberals

How to put your head in the sand (no pun intended): accuse the other side of being terrorist apologists. Also, it's pretty funny how conservatives are blaming France's immigration policy while accusing liberals of "blaming the victim".

 

[Horatio Parker]

You start by picturing the other side as consisting of people who are as sincere as we are, instead of a pack of devils. Unless...

My moral imagination is insufficient to laud their sincerity in the beheading of groups of children, or their crucifixion. My moral imagination can't embrace the idea that groups of people, including women and children, are routinely executed for the crimes of "refusing to fast", "blasphemy", and "practicing magic".

And that's your problem. Also, you appear to be confused: understanding is not approval or betrayal.

Seems to me that a casual sadism was operating at Abu Graib, or at CIA black sites. Seems to me that the horrors you list were done in say Vietnam by Americans whose morality you would approve.

Maybe you're not trying hard enough.

I wonder if you don't have common ground with IS. Wouldn't you welcome a war to the finish with Islam? So would they.

So how is it that ISIS apologist liberals worry so much about the sincerity of evil? Seriously?

The only IS apologists here are those in your overheated imagination.

I agree, they do wish to provoke conflict. And as long as the West does little, they are going to keep provoking with murderous terrorism. As they are always more than happy to slaughter in the City of Lights, I would suggest that the French seriously take the war to them. Make them focus their energy on defense.

But perhaps you suggest the French beg them for their list of demands, crawl like supine rodents, and comply?

Another product of your fevered mind: the craven defeated appeasers. No, we do more of what we have been doing: treat terrorism as a law enforcement problem.

Responsible international behavior would help, but that's too much to hope for.

 

[laughing dog]

max and his fellow traveler seem to think you can kill an idea or belief by killing enough people.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The question is; How many Muslims are terrorists because of harm done to them or people they care about by the US or some other Western power?

The terrorist has a religion.

But more importantly they have a past.

Question: How many million times are you going to repeat this same bogus claim?

Islam has been on the warpath for it's whole existence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think what we need to understand and appreciate is those who would blow themselves up to kill others. I think this understanding is key. We can destroy ISIS. We can destroy Al Qaeda, but to think another group with a new name would not emerge is very short-sighted. Perhaps we're not fighting the right enemy.

Yeah, we aren't.

We should be going after the recruiters and those who are funding it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

One has to understand what is going on (for the most part) to mitigate the problem. The moment anyone is critical of anything that the US has done in its past as part of the cause, they're accused of being apologists. Rational people should know better.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not thinking of body/missile ratio.

http://www.newsweek.com/november-dr...en-children-reportedly-killed-pakistan-288448

In the six attempts it took to kill Qari Hussain, for example, 128 people were killed, including 13 children.

They were trying to kill a terrorist, and how many of these 128 were terrorists, just with different from "Qari Hussain" name?

Yeah. An awful lot of the ones we kill that weren't the targets were bodyguards of the target.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The question is; How many Muslims are terrorists because of harm done to them or people they care about by the US or some other Western power?

The terrorist has a religion.

But more importantly they have a past.

Question: How many million times are you going to repeat this same bogus claim?

Islam has been on the warpath for it's whole existence.

If that is true then 1/4 of the Earth's population should have been at war with us for the last 1400 years. Funny they did not wipe us out in the World Wars when Europe and Asia were killing tens of millions over notions of racial purity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why do some people focus on "US Intervention in the Middle East" as a way to justify this horrible act? Yes, the US intervened in the region, sponsored unjust governments and started wars. That is wrong, but it is entirely politically and economically motivated. This is religiously motivated. I spell it for you: R E L I G I O N. Now you know where the problem is. You wanna know how I am so sure if it? Because there is another region down south from the US that saw a lot of politically motivated aggression from the "West". It is called Latin America, where the US has started several wars and violently changed regimes. Yet you do not see Guatemalans blowing themselves in DC or Chileans gunning down people in L.A. Gee I wonder why?

They focus on US intervention because they blame the US for all that goes wrong in the world.

 

[abaddon]

Why do some people focus on "US Intervention in the Middle East" as a way to justify this horrible act? Yes, the US intervened in the region, sponsored unjust governments and started wars. That is wrong, but it is entirely politically and economically motivated. This is religiously motivated. I spell it for you: R E L I G I O N. Now you know where the problem is. You wanna know how I am so sure if it? Because there is another region down south from the US that saw a lot of politically motivated aggression from the "West". It is called Latin America, where the US has started several wars and violently changed regimes. Yet you do not see Guatemalans blowing themselves in DC or Chileans gunning down people in L.A. Gee I wonder why?

Because they're Catholic?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why do some people focus on "US Intervention in the Middle East" as a way to justify this horrible act? Yes, the US intervened in the region, sponsored unjust governments and started wars. That is wrong, but it is entirely politically and economically motivated. This is religiously motivated. I spell it for you: R E L I G I O N. Now you know where the problem is. You wanna know how I am so sure if it? Because there is another region down south from the US that saw a lot of politically motivated aggression from the "West". It is called Latin America, where the US has started several wars and violently changed regimes. Yet you do not see Guatemalans blowing themselves in DC or Chileans gunning down people in L.A. Gee I wonder why?

They focus on US intervention because they blame the US for all that goes wrong in the world.

Yes, much like how the self hating Europeans blame Versailles for WWII and German aggression.

The Iraqi invasion created a massive amount of instability. Much like how the proxy war in Afghanistan helped forge a path towards 9/11, the Iraqi Invasion helped continue anti-west sentiment and destabilized the Middle East, creating a new Afghanistan.

Now while I think you would want to ignore any implication that could exist from the deaths of 100,000+ Iraqis and the displacement of over 1,000,000 Iraqis, and the uncounted civilian death toll from all sorts of strikes since, these things don't dissipate in the minds of those living over there, suffering from shit American foreign policy decisions and occupations. This stuff is quite real to them. And there are a few that are egging people to become radicalized.

The US and Europe didn't attack Paris, but their policies in the Middle East were certainly a major ingredient for the motive of the attacks.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

max and his fellow traveler seem to think you can kill an idea or belief by killing enough people.

Worked in Vietnam...

...ummm...

...nevermind.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Why do some people focus on "US Intervention in the Middle East" as a way to justify this horrible act? Yes, the US intervened in the region, sponsored unjust governments and started wars. That is wrong, but it is entirely politically and economically motivated. This is religiously motivated. I spell it for you: R E L I G I O N. Now you know where the problem is. You wanna know how I am so sure if it? Because there is another region down south from the US that saw a lot of politically motivated aggression from the "West". It is called Latin America, where the US has started several wars and violently changed regimes. Yet you do not see Guatemalans blowing themselves in DC or Chileans gunning down people in L.A. Gee I wonder why?

They focus on US intervention because they blame the US for all that goes wrong in the world.

It is the fault of the US and the mechanics of this is very simple. Get Rid of Saddam and radicals will fill the void and it happened. Then Add Libya and Syria. Trace the current events to the point where this started. In Gaddafi's case the lynch mob started on each other as his corpse was still warm.

 

[maxparrish]

UPDATE: Confirmed. At least one attacker held French citizenship. Another attacker held a Syrian passport, and was let in as a refugee.

 

[Harry Bosch]

They focus on US intervention because they blame the US for all that goes wrong in the world.

It is the fault of the US and the mechanics of this is very simple. Get Rid of Saddam and radicals will fill the void and it happened. Then Add Libya and Syria. Trace the current events to the point where this started. In Gaddafi's case the lynch mob started on each other as his corpse was still warm.

Their is plenty of blame in the ME. Yes the Iraq invasion was a disaster. But to ignore all the other factors, people, and history is very naïve. The ME starting falling behind the world in the 1400s. European redrawing of the map after WW1 was a disaster. We could go back and forth forever. IMO, the ME will continue to be a hellhole until there is a successful liberal democracy that the people can believe in.

 

[TSwizzle]

Islam has been on the warpath for it's whole existence.

Indeed, this is the normal state of affairs for the followers of teh islam. There have been ebbs and flows throughout the islamic assault on the "west", The ebb over the few hundreds years in part due to the advanced technology of the "west".

 

[maxparrish]

max and his fellow traveler seem to think you can kill an idea or belief by killing enough people.

Worked in Vietnam...

...ummm...

...nevermind.

The objective is not to kill an idea. Nor is it to kill all muslims. It is to kill those people likely to act on the idea, before they act. If it takes killing several thousand or 10s of thousand of ISIS in Syria to mitigate terrorism in Europe, I am all for it. How about you?