Flobalob wrote:You think it takes more than a day to organise a retaliatory air strike? ISIS consider themselves a STATE, as does everyone else in every way besides name. When another country bombs yours, are you going to leave it more than a day to bomb theirs? French jets have been conducting reconnaissance flights in the Raqqa area for months so the hard part was more or less done.
I'm interested to know what your course of action would be.
I'd start by not giving weapons to overly-religious fanatics.
Please point me to some proof that that has happened.
Certainly.
For starters, what you should know is that ISIS is necessarily Al Qa'ida in Iraq. I mean literally. That's what it was before being rebranded as ISIS.
Now I doubt you'll agree again, but in the past three years, over 70 US businesses have won over 25 billions dollars out of the middle East alone. Be that Oil deals, loans to countries or whatnot. Of course no report would ever mention the selling if firearms and explosives, but get realistic, how else could all the terrorists be supplied such tech?
There is also the fact that until recently, ISIS has "luckily" taken care of all of US' business in the middle East, without having the US do anything. From killing leaders to terrorizing the people, they got all of the dirty work done, and they didn't even mind. I doubt you'll ever find someone admitting that either.
Need more? I can go on and on and on about US and the middle East.
Flobalob wrote:You think it takes more than a day to organise a retaliatory air strike? ISIS consider themselves a STATE, as does everyone else in every way besides name. When another country bombs yours, are you going to leave it more than a day to bomb theirs? French jets have been conducting reconnaissance flights in the Raqqa area for months so the hard part was more or less done.
I'm interested to know what your course of action would be.
I'd start by not giving weapons to overly-religious fanatics.
Please point me to some proof that that has happened.
Certainly.
For starters, what you should know is that ISIS is necessarily Al Qa'ida in Iraq. I mean literally. That's what it was before being rebranded as ISIS.
Now I doubt you'll agree again, but in the past three years, over 70 US businesses have won over 25 billions dollars out of the middle East alone. Be that Oil deals, loans to countries or whatnot. Of course no report would ever mention the selling if firearms and explosives, but get realistic, how else could all the terrorists be supplied such tech?
There is also the fact that until recently, ISIS has "luckily" taken care of all of US' business in the middle East, without having the US do anything. From killing leaders to terrorizing the people, they got all of the dirty work done, and they didn't even mind. I doubt you'll ever find someone admitting that either.
Need more? I can go on and on and on about US and the middle East.
That's not proof. That's speculation about the circumstances of what may or may not be going on in the Middle East without any evidence to support said speculation.
The french authorities released a couple reports detailing that 5 out of the 7(?) attackers were born and raised in France and I think about 2 of the 5 were born in Paris itself.
turns out it wasn't the Syrian migrants after all lmao
but no france, close off your borders to Syria and open fire onto Syrian refugees!!!
Flobalob wrote:You think it takes more than a day to organise a retaliatory air strike? ISIS consider themselves a STATE, as does everyone else in every way besides name. When another country bombs yours, are you going to leave it more than a day to bomb theirs? French jets have been conducting reconnaissance flights in the Raqqa area for months so the hard part was more or less done.
I'm interested to know what your course of action would be.
I'd start by not giving weapons to overly-religious fanatics.
Please point me to some proof that that has happened.
Certainly.
For starters, what you should know is that ISIS is necessarily Al Qa'ida in Iraq. I mean literally. That's what it was before being rebranded as ISIS.
Now I doubt you'll agree again, but in the past three years, over 70 US businesses have won over 25 billions dollars out of the middle East alone. Be that Oil deals, loans to countries or whatnot. Of course no report would ever mention the selling if firearms and explosives, but get realistic, how else could all the terrorists be supplied such tech?
There is also the fact that until recently, ISIS has "luckily" taken care of all of US' business in the middle East, without having the US do anything. From killing leaders to terrorizing the people, they got all of the dirty work done, and they didn't even mind. I doubt you'll ever find someone admitting that either.
Need more? I can go on and on and on about US and the middle East.
So what you're saying is basically that you can't prove any of it and it's all just speculative crap.
I already knew that. It's not like that was some secret classified information. But what YOU should know is that whilst what is now known as ISIS stemmed from an Al-Qaeda group, they were basically kicked out of Al-Qaeda for being too radical and brutal, and even Al-Qaeda have criticised their brutal tactics and do not like them one bit.
I'll easily believe $25 billion has been made out of the Middle East in the last three years; it's oil and gas exports are just crazy, but US companies making money from Middle Eastern exports has nothing to do with ISIS.
How else could ISIS get armaments? By stealing them. They pretty much own more of Iraq and Syria than Iraq and Syria do right now, and with that comes all the armaments that were in those places that they captured.
Again, please prove that.
Shadowstar1922 wrote:The french authorities released a couple reports detailing that 5 out of the 7(?) attackers were born and raised in France and I think about 2 of the 5 were born in Paris itself.
turns out it wasn't the Syrian migrants after all lmao
but no france, close off your borders to Syria and open fire onto Syrian refugees!!!
5 out of 7.. which leaves 2. They said 2 had passed through Greece. I don't see your point.
September Quiz - 2nd October Contest - 2nd Official most likely to become the new Kim Kardashian - #Betterthanyou
I want to pose a question to those condemning France's security choices and I ask. What should they do? Raise it? Lower it? What do Americans and conspiracy theorists think that France should do to calm their people, protect their people, and return to as much normality as they can.
-Best Storyteller award
"You have to pass on the torch sometime, just make sure it's a light and not a disease"
The Divine Potato wrote:I want to pose a question to those condemning France's security choices and I ask. What should they do? Raise it? Lower it? What do Americans and conspiracy theorists think that France should do to calm their people, protect their people, and return to as much normality as they can.
They shouldn't do anything, they should keep their security as it was. You act as if the French people were in some kind of threat.(before their recent actions). Striking at M.E. only made things worse imo and I'll get real annoyed if at the next terrorist strike in France anyone says it was unexpected. I do agree that it was a bad thing to happen in Paris (atho it was a reaction absolutely equal to EU's actions in the middle east, but the next one will be 150% deserved, should it happen.
As to Flob's statement (which is pretty much what you'd expect).
OFCOURSE you can't have hard evidence, do you think I'd be a moron to post deep web site links here and give half the users freaking Trojans or worse? The fact that you believe that US armaments can be stolen that easily by ANYONE is either just ignorant crap or propaganda crap. Pick one.
And you are saying that having 2 out of 7 terrorists be illegal immigrants is as bad as having all of them be?
Dude that's some serious 'Murica syndrome right there. And by that I mean that blaming everything on immigrants just because you can't even handle your internal affairs at all and opress certain minorities.
On other news, I loved the Charlie front-page, keeping it real
sounds like France treats their Muslim population like America does its black population. it's hard to sympathize with the French government after knowing how they treat Muslims.
Shadow00 wrote:As to Flob's statement (which is pretty much what you'd expect).
So you've said from the outset that you know you're wrong.
Shadow00 wrote:OFCOURSE you can't have hard evidence, do you think I'd be a moron to post deep web site links here and give half the users freaking Trojans or worse? The fact that you believe that US armaments can be stolen that easily by ANYONE is either just ignorant crap or propaganda crap. Pick one.
If you have no proof, you have no proof. It didn't happen. It's that simple. You can't definitively say something is happening without proof; you're literally just speculating.
What do you want, a flowchart?
Weapons sold to Iraqi and Syrian militaries | V Iraqi and Syrian militaries overthrown by ISIS | V Either they are killed or are forced to retreat, leaving bases empty and containing whatever armaments were there | V ISIS uses what they leave behind
Shadow00 wrote:And you are saying that having 2 out of 7 terrorists be illegal immigrants is as bad as having all of them be?
No? I didn't say that, but regardless whether 1 or 50 terrorists are illegal immigrants entering as part of the refugee crisis, it's still showing that the refugee crisis is being used to the advantage of terrorists. This means that you have something you can shut down to prevent even just 1 terrorist entering the country. It may just be 1 terrorist, but that's one less AK47 shooting into a crowd, one less suicide vest detonating in a packed theatre or stadium.
Shadow00 wrote:Dude that's some serious 'Murica syndrome right there. And by that I mean that blaming everything on immigrants just because you can't even handle your internal affairs at all and opress certain minorities.
No one is blaming everything on the immigrants. Blame has also been placed on the French security services for allowing radicalized Jihadists to slip through the net. You chose to focus on the closing of French borders, not me.
September Quiz - 2nd October Contest - 2nd Official most likely to become the new Kim Kardashian - #Betterthanyou
Shadow00 wrote:As to Flob's statement (which is pretty much what you'd expect).
So you've said from the outset that you know you're wrong.
Shadow00 wrote:OFCOURSE you can't have hard evidence, do you think I'd be a moron to post deep web site links here and give half the users freaking Trojans or worse? The fact that you believe that US armaments can be stolen that easily by ANYONE is either just ignorant crap or propaganda crap. Pick one.
If you have no proof, you have no proof. It didn't happen. It's that simple. You can't definitively say something is happening without proof; you're literally just speculating.
What do you want, a flowchart?
Weapons sold to Iraqi and Syrian militaries | V Iraqi and Syrian militaries overthrown by ISIS | V Either they are killed or are forced to retreat, leaving bases empty and containing whatever armaments were there | V ISIS uses what they leave behind
Shadow00 wrote:And you are saying that having 2 out of 7 terrorists be illegal immigrants is as bad as having all of them be?
No? I didn't say that, but regardless whether 1 or 50 terrorists are illegal immigrants entering as part of the refugee crisis, it's still showing that the refugee crisis is being used to the advantage of terrorists. This means that you have something you can shut down to prevent even just 1 terrorist entering the country. It may just be 1 terrorist, but that's one less AK47 shooting into a crowd, one less suicide vest detonating in a packed theatre or stadium.
Shadow00 wrote:Dude that's some serious 'Murica syndrome right there. And by that I mean that blaming everything on immigrants just because you can't even handle your internal affairs at all and opress certain minorities.
No one is blaming everything on the immigrants. Blame has also been placed on the French security services for allowing radicalized Jihadists to slip through the net. You chose to focus on the closing of French borders, not me.
First of all, from the get-go what I said is that you stuck to the classic style of "its the immigrants' fault" that people use. Or that much I got from your last post. You seem to counter that with your closing statement now. Owell. As to this one. Your flowchart is extremely nice, I'm sure you used up so much time making it you forgot to think what it says.
You have about a ton of military armed with new weapons, explosives, that have bases being guarded with people etc Then ISIS attacks with, ughhh machetes? I mean they don't have guns since they had no money OR anyone willing to donate them, according to you. And they somehow overtake the army. Either ISIS is led by 21st century Napoleon in which case the EU should surrender already,OR the Syrian army pulled a WW2 France on that front. Or you're just being mistaken over something.
About borders issue. You closing down borders and defending them means you create an anti-foreigner policy in your country. In France's case, a country legit filled with thousands of foreigners, there are people that could view this as a fascist move (I mean I do and I'm not even in france nor plan to ever visit) so that means you could stop 1 terrorist and create 10 more.
5/7 jihadists being inside the country, I'd say the French shouldn't just build a "wall" around their borders and should just focus on the inland.
After all French and walls don't really get along well.
-
