Fusillade à Paris

[Gunpowder]

Whoa, I was unfamiliar with that overthrowing. All over oil.

[howard]

Sorry, I gotta take some of the more proximate causes of this terrorism. Like the invasion of Iraq. Like the support of KSA while they created this whole Wahhabist bullshit and spread it around the region. Like the destruction of Libya (thanks, Hillary!) Like the shit in Syria. Like the drone warfare that kills thousands more innocent bystanders than the collective attacks in Europe and the USA, creating thousands of terrorists in the process as they see their loved ones turned to red mist (thank you Obama!) Like the very specific creation of and ongoing support of ISIS by KSA, and by our military. Because they were fighting Assad.

The horror and mass death caused by the USA and NATO countries over the recent decades is the proximate cause of this attack yesterday. Not the sack of Bagdad by the Mongols in the 14th century. Not even the post-WW1 colonization of the destroyed Ottoman empire.

The USA and our allies created ISIS. Just like Al Qaada in Afghanistan; it just took much less time for the blowback to occur. The recent actions of our government are much much more relevant to causes and to prevention of terror attacks than the deep history of the region. Blaming it on 'a long losing streak of Islam' is a cop out. Such thinking prevents rational and logical actions (which will not be considered or undertaken anyway, at least this side of Putin.)

The enemy at the root of 21st century Islamist terror is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. When the west is ready to invade there, or otherwise effect regime change in Riyadh, wake me up. They are on a path to self-destruction, between the rapidly shifting economics of oil demand and their Vietnam experience in Yemen. Of course, what follows there could well be ISIS/Al Qaada, but at least some rational actors (Putin and Iran) will do their level best to prevent that.

While I'm on a roll, a couple other points. I'll leave the Israel part of the discussion for another time, only to note the current cozy relationship between KSA and Israel.

To reiterate, Hillary orchestrated the war in Libya, conducted by NATO. This was a horrific mistake in terms of strengthening the terrorist side.

ISIS also killed about 40 people going about their business in Beirut just a few days ago with suicide bombs. Because the victims were brown and presumably mostly muslim, the reaction here was quite different. Further, because the victims were in a Hezbollah neighborhood, some folks in the US Govt thought it wasn't so bad. Since Hezbollah is fighting on the side of Assad; despite the fact that Hezbollah is actively fighting against ISIS in Syria. I cannot express how much this disgusts me, the differential valuing of human life based upon skin color, religion, geographic location and other politics. My understanding of why this is only deepens my disgust and revulsion.

One more thing. French security arrested someone three months ago who was apparently planning this attack. Some of the perpetrators of yesterday's attack were previously arrested and were known to police. Yes, it is difficult for security services to connect all the dots and prevent these incidents. But I am convinced that not only does mass surveillance does not help, it detracts from prevention because it diverts resources from on the ground policing/human intellegence.

here is a good link that says what i've attempted to say much better: Some observations about the carnage in Paris

[Joe K]

Sorry, I gotta take some of the more proximate causes of this terrorism. Like the invasion of Iraq. Like the support of KSA while they created this whole Wahhabist bullshit and spread it around the region. Like the destruction of Libya (thanks, Hillary!) Like the shit in Syria. Like the drone warfare that kills thousands more innocent bystanders than the collective attacks in Europe and the USA, creating thousands of terrorists in the process as they see their loved ones turned to red mist (thank you Obama!) Like the very specific creation of and ongoing support of ISIS by KSA, and by our military. Because they were fighting Assad.

The horror and mass death caused by the USA and NATO countries over the recent decades is the proximate cause of this attack yesterday. Not the sack of Bagdad by the Mongols in the 14th century. Not even the post-WW1 colonization of the destroyed Ottoman empire.

The USA and our allies created ISIS. Just like Al Qaada in Afghanistan; it just took much less time for the blowback to occur. The recent actions of our government are much much more relevant to causes and to prevention of terror attacks than the deep history of the region. Blaming it on 'a long losing streak of Islam' is a cop out. Such thinking prevents rational and logical actions (which will not be considered or undertaken anyway, at least this side of Putin.)

The enemy at the root of 21st century Islamist terror is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. When the west is ready to invade there, or otherwise effect regime change in Riyadh, wake me up. They are on a path to self-destruction, between the rapidly shifting economics of oil demand and their Vietnam experience in Yemen. Of course, what follows there could well be ISIS/Al Qaada, but at least some rational actors (Putin and Iran) will do their level best to prevent that.

While I'm on a roll, a couple other points. I'll leave the Israel part of the discussion for another time, only to note the current cozy relationship between KSA and Israel.

To reiterate, Hillary orchestrated the war in Libya, conducted by NATO. This was a horrific mistake in terms of strengthening the terrorist side.

ISIS also killed about 40 people going about their business in Beirut just a few days ago with suicide bombs. Because the victims were brown and presumably mostly muslim, the reaction here was quite different. Further, because the victims were in a Hezbollah neighborhood, some folks in the US Govt thought it wasn't so bad. Since Hezbollah is fighting on the side of Assad; despite the fact that Hezbollah is actively fighting against ISIS in Syria. I cannot express how much this disgusts me, the differential valuing of human life based upon skin color, religion, geographic location and other politics. My understanding of why this is only deepens my disgust and revulsion.

One more thing. French security arrested someone three months ago who was apparently planning this attack. Some of the perpetrators of yesterday's attack were previously arrested and were known to police. Yes, it is difficult for security services to connect all the dots and prevent these incidents. But I am convinced that not only does mass surveillance does not help, it detracts from prevention because it diverts resources from on the ground policing/human intellegence.

here is a good link that says what i've attempted to say much better: Some observations about the carnage in Paris

I agree with all of this. The massive number of civilian casualties directly caused by Western military intervention in the Middle East since 2001 is more than sufficient, to me, to answer the "why are they so angry" question.

[howard]

Whoa, I was unfamiliar with that overthrowing. All over oil.

The successful CIA coup in Iran in 1953 is one of the most important historic events post WW2. It speaks to the strength and cohesiveness of the Iranian/Persian society and culture that despite that, despite their own flavor of backwards islamic fundamentalism, (very notably not the KSA/wahhabist/AlQaada/ISIS variant,) despite decades of sanctions, despite a US-backed Sadaam Hussein/Iraq invasion of their country in the 80s, they have managed to survive and remain a crucial regional power, now on the front lines of the actual effective military campaign against ISIS.

But the worse effect of that coup is that is made the CIA think they could subsequently replicate their success. It made them think they were capable of pulling it off anywhere, anytime. Their dismal record of repeated failure, over and over, has done nothing to shake their confidence. So, they keep on, wreaking havoc and failing, again and again.

One day a strong president will shut those clowns down.

[degenerasian]

I dont disagree with this. My question is why is the 18 year old french born muslim guy angry?

[Jerloma]

Let me guess...Howard's pretending that this has nothing to do with religion again.

[howard]

Your attempts to place words in my mouth have become laughable. So I laugh.

[Joe K]

Let me guess...Howard's pretending that this has nothing to do with religion again.

I'm not going to say that it has "nothing to do with religion," because obviously religion matters. But if it's all about the evils of religion, and not other geopolitical forces, how come we don't see more acts of anti-Western terrorism committed by Muslims of Turkish or Indonesian descent? (Not that there aren't examples of this, but it sure seems most of the Islamist terrorism threat originates in countries and regions that have been especially destabilized by Western interventions.)

[howard]

What Preceded The Islamic State Attacks In France - Some Links (Updated)

[Jerloma]

Let me guess...Howard's pretending that this has nothing to do with religion again.

I'm not going to say that it has "nothing to do with religion," because obviously religion matters. But if it's all about the evils of religion, and not other geopolitical forces, how come we don't see more acts of anti-Western terrorism committed by Muslims of Turkish or Indonesian descent? (Not that there aren't examples of this, but it sure seems most of the Islamist terrorism threat originates in countries and regions that have been especially destabilized by Western interventions.)

Theocratic governments. Turkey and Indonesia have governments that keep religion on as short leash...as do we, thankfully. A lot of people have really shitty ideas about how the world works and that's dangerous in itself but when your government not only endorses those ideas but actually works them into their constitutions, that's the most dangerous idea that there is. Think about what a shithole this country would be if the constitution was tied in any way to the bible. That's what you have in Middle East. Religion isn't the only way to create a totalitarian, fascist regime...it's just the easiest way and the hardest to kill. These terrorists aren't evil people, they were just born in a place where they've been pelted with misguided virtues for their entire lives. If religious faith is so fucking benign or god forbid, virtuous; how come it's the people with the most of it that we have to worry about the most?

[Jerloma]

And with the #prayforparis shit, why, when something terrible happens for explicitly religious reasons does it always occur to the humans that what we need now is more religion?

[degenerasian]

All NBA and NHL arenas are playing the French anthem tonight.

[bfj]

True dat, Isreali land was promised to the Palestinians in the WW1 peace treaties. I had no idea about that until recently.

It was promised to Jews before that by the Balfour Declaration of 1917.

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

[Johnnie]

Dan Carlin's latest podcast is mandatory listening. It was originally about Bill Gates and climate change, but then it switches to terrorism about 2/3rds through because of his timing when recording it.

[govmentchedda]

Dan Carlin's latest podcast is mandatory listening. It was originally about Bill Gates and climate change, but then it switches to terrorism about 2/3rds through because of his timing when recording it.

Common Sense, not Hardcore History.

[Johnnie]

Yea, shouldda specified.

Also, we've reached the #AllTerroristAttacksMatter phase because there's backlash for not giving Beirut, Syria, and Gaza enough press.

[Pruitt]

I dont disagree with this. My question is why is the 18 year old french born muslim guy angry?

They were born in countries - referring to the European guys - where they were distinctly second class citizens. But unlike first generation sons of immigrants in years gone by, these kids - through satellite TV, internet, radical imams - were still in touch with their parents' homelands. Past generations, once they left the countries of their birth, that was pretty much it. They were gone and the ways of the old country slowly drifted away and there was a degree of assimilation that seems to be missing now. With one foot in a rich country, and one foot in the land of their grandparents, they get an idealized picture of what their world could be like. More concerned with what they are lacking rather than striving and fighting to get ahead. Maybe because the opportunities aren't there for young male immigrants, maybe because it's easier to scrape buy on social assistance rather than work hard. (western Europe after all).

Meanwhile, they are not getting ahead in what their parents probably thought was a land of freedom and opportunity. Unemployed, anger inflamed by community leaders... fingers pointed at their new homes, at the west in general, at Zionists, Europeans, Americans, anyone who is standing in their way. And in the past "their way" could have been personal success, getting ahead, establishing their communities in their new homecountries. But now "their way" seems to be an establishment of a fundamentalist Muslim state in the land of western democracies. And it can mean sowing terror for its own sake.

High youth unemployment with dim prospects for the future is the classic recipe for producing criminals. This is seen all over the world. In the case of western Europe and many Arab countries, the crimes that attract a lot of these young men are especially heinous in intent.

This book is incredible - about the rise of angry Islam in the Netherlands. Not a diatribe, an even handed look at the situation by a respected historian who was anguished over events in his home country.

[Johnnie]

And with the #prayforparis shit, why, when something terrible happens for explicitly religious reasons does it always occur to the humans that what we need now is more religion?

I just shared the simple, non controversial stuff on Facebook. But let me tell you, this Anthony Jeselnik portion of his standup ran through my head (especially when the French flag filter started happening):



Also, this is what a Charlie Hebdo artist drew after the attacks:



And fresh news: French official: One suicide bomber entered EU by hiding in tide of refugees

Fuck.

[Gunpowder]

True dat, Isreali land was promised to the Palestinians in the WW1 peace treaties. I had no idea about that until recently.

It was promised to Jews before that by the Balfour Declaration of 1917.

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

I'm not picking a side, just noting that this particular conflict was largely the result of Western intervention.

[Gunpowder]

Let me guess...Howard's pretending that this has nothing to do with religion again.

I'm not going to say that it has "nothing to do with religion," because obviously religion matters. But if it's all about the evils of religion, and not other geopolitical forces, how come we don't see more acts of anti-Western terrorism committed by Muslims of Turkish or Indonesian descent? (Not that there aren't examples of this, but it sure seems most of the Islamist terrorism threat originates in countries and regions that have been especially destabilized by Western interventions.)

Theocratic governments. Turkey and Indonesia have governments that keep religion on as short leash...as do we, thankfully. A lot of people have really shitty ideas about how the world works and that's dangerous in itself but when your government not only endorses those ideas but actually works them into their constitutions, that's the most dangerous idea that there is. Think about what a shithole this country would be if the constitution was tied in any way to the bible. That's what you have in Middle East. Religion isn't the only way to create a totalitarian, fascist regime...it's just the easiest way and the hardest to kill. These terrorists aren't evil people, they were just born in a place where they've been pelted with misguided virtues for their entire lives. If religious faith is so fucking benign or god forbid, virtuous; how come it's the people with the most of it that we have to worry about the most?

Erdogan seems to be moving Turkey more towards an Islamic state. I wouldn't say that religion is "kept on a short leash" there. I'm probably wrong but that's how I see it.

[Gunpowder]

And again just to be clear I'm not saying these attacks occurred because of the siege of Baghdad. Just noting when Islamic lack of progress was brought up.

We're way too cool with KSA, fa sho.

[howard]

And again just to be clear I'm not saying these attacks occurred because of the siege of Baghdad. Just noting when Islamic lack of progress was brought up.

I know you aren't. And I'm not saying that the long arc of history is irrelevant in understanding current conflicts. The Sunni-Shia schism is central to today's clusterfuck.

[DC47]

For most of the long arc of history, did the differences between Sunni and Shia forms of Islam amount to much in terms of violent conflict? My impression was that recent times have been unprecedented. And that the divergence may have been due to strategic intent by political actors in the middle east.

There are some great thoughts here. I'm enjoying the history and politics lesson.

[howard]

For most of the long arc of history, did the differences between Sunni and Shia forms of Islam amount to much in terms of violent conflict?

That is a great point/question. My knee-jerk answer is that the Ottoman empire kept the lid on such tensions (much like Saadam and the Baaths did in Iraq, and the way other dictators, like Kaadafi, quash tribal beefs in their countries.) Ottomans go back several hundred years. Or it could be a lot of Shia found their way to Persia/SouthEastern Iraq as the Ottomans expanded.

The intra-muslim violence in Pakistan/Bangladesh, at the time of partition and of Bangladeshi independence, has some roots in the schism, I think. A lot of blood spilt in those two periods.

But hell if I know, that is just top-of-the-head rambling. Another area of my ignorance to be eradicated.

ETA: there was a time when Iran was Sunni, and it forceably shifted to Shia under the rule of Ismail I, in the early 16th century. He established the Safavid dynasty, which ruled Persia for a couple of centuries. This was quite the bloody affair. That was nagging at my memory; my roommate in medical school was half-Iranian, and used to explain this stuff to me. I've forgotten a lot of it.

[degenerasian]

I dont disagree with this. My question is why is the 18 year old french born muslim guy angry?

They were born in countries - referring to the European guys - where they were distinctly second class citizens. But unlike first generation sons of immigrants in years gone by, these kids - through satellite TV, internet, radical imams - were still in touch with their parents' homelands. Past generations, once they left the countries of their birth, that was pretty much it. They were gone and the ways of the old country slowly drifted away and there was a degree of assimilation that seems to be missing now. With one foot in a rich country, and one foot in the land of their grandparents, they get an idealized picture of what their world could be like. More concerned with what they are lacking rather than striving and fighting to get ahead. Maybe because the opportunities aren't there for young male immigrants, maybe because it's easier to scrape buy on social assistance rather than work hard. (western Europe after all).

Meanwhile, they are not getting ahead in what their parents probably thought was a land of freedom and opportunity. Unemployed, anger inflamed by community leaders... fingers pointed at their new homes, at the west in general, at Zionists, Europeans, Americans, anyone who is standing in their way. And in the past "their way" could have been personal success, getting ahead, establishing their communities in their new homecountries. But now "their way" seems to be an establishment of a fundamentalist Muslim state in the land of western democracies. And it can mean sowing terror for its own sake.

High youth unemployment with dim prospects for the future is the classic recipe for producing criminals. This is seen all over the world. In the case of western Europe and many Arab countries, the crimes that attract a lot of these young men are especially heinous in intent.

This book is incredible - about the rise of angry Islam in the Netherlands. Not a diatribe, an even handed look at the situation by a respected historian who was anguished over events in his home country.

hmmm

I just don't get it. Maybe it's from my own background. I'm a son of refugees who came to Canada in 1975. I've been taught to embrace Canadian culture and only look forward. After 1975 Vietnam turned into an absolute communist shithole until the doors opened 20 years later. But we were taught to never look back. We've gone the extreme the other way, forgetting language and culture. It would be hard to find a western-born Vietnamese kid under 30 who can speak Vietnamese. We're often accused of having lost touch with our roots. Being 'whitewashed'. But that's fine with us, we like being "American". We go through some of the same racial obstacles but we just keep moving forward and try to break down those barriers.

So it must be in the Muslim culture somewhere that makes the 18 year old Muslim guy angry. And if he's angry why doesn't just leave Islam. In American, most of the Christians (and others) who grew up hating religion have just left it. Why don't they? I know in this forum alone some have held on to their religion, some have left it. The Muslim guy seems restricted, conflicted, and angry.

[howard]

The immigrant experience, and the variety of choice of immigrant experience, is quite different in the UK, France and other countries than in North America. Frankly, the English and the French shit on muslim immigrants far more than even the US shit on immigrants. French racism is pretty bad. Compare your country's controversy over the burka to that in France, for one example.

[degenerasian]

Some Canadian Muslims have joined ISIS. Right here in Calgary has turned into a bit of a hub. They totally get shit on here too because they dont assimilate.

[howard]

If you choose to assimilate, I think it is more difficult in France than here. I am no expert, and of course I am biased by my own experiences with racism, economic opportunities and assimilation. Assimilation is a complicated thing.

[degenerasian]

If you choose to assimilate, I think it is more difficult in France than here. I am no expert, and of course I am biased by my own experiences with racism, economic opportunities and assimilation. Assimilation is a complicated thing.

Sure we all have our own biases but the first step is to choose the assimilate. Have to do it.

[howard]

I just mean I don't have much knowledge or any experience living abroad, and there are limits to how well my outsider experience can be applied to other places. In other words, these opinions of mine are much less informed than my opinions about American racism.

[rass]

Various sources reporting that France ihas started bombing of ISIS targets in Syria.

[howard]

Ten sorties, twenty bombs, in urban Raqqa, the 'capital' of ISIS. Russia has already bombed Raqqa repeatedly, at the start of their campaign last month and as recently as last week. Earlier in the war the Syrian air force bombed the city as well.

I hope they coordinated with Russia.

[brian]

The immigrant experience, and the variety of choice of immigrant experience, is quite different in the UK, France and other countries than in North America. Frankly, the English and the French shit on muslim immigrants far more than even the US shit on immigrants. French racism is pretty bad. Compare your country's controversy over the burka to that in France, for one example.

If you live in Southern Nevada or Southern California or a numerous list of other places in the US the immigrant experience and lack of assimilation is in your face especially from lowest common denominator shitheads. I get like 10 percent of the argument. If you're going to live in a country you should at least make an effort to be moderately able to speak the language. If I lived in Mexico or Panama or Ecuador I couldn't promise fluency but I'd make an effort. But I DO appreciate and have no issue with maintaining your culture and heritage. I'm the better for having a better exposure to Mexicans and their culture.

[degenerasian]

The immigrant experience, and the variety of choice of immigrant experience, is quite different in the UK, France and other countries than in North America. Frankly, the English and the French shit on muslim immigrants far more than even the US shit on immigrants. French racism is pretty bad. Compare your country's controversy over the burka to that in France, for one example.

If you live in Southern Nevada or Southern California or a numerous list of other places in the US the immigrant experience and lack of assimilation is in your face especially from lowest common denominator shitheads. I get like 10 percent of the argument. If you're going to live in a country you should at least make an effort to be moderately able to speak the language. If I lived in Mexico or Panama or Ecuador I couldn't promise fluency but I'd make an effort. But I DO appreciate and have no issue with maintaining your culture and heritage. I'm the better for having a better exposure to Mexicans and their culture.

Immigrants not assimilating is only one part, the other part is they want us to change laws to suit them as well. I mean Muslims want to practice Sharia Law here.

[brian]

The immigrant experience, and the variety of choice of immigrant experience, is quite different in the UK, France and other countries than in North America. Frankly, the English and the French shit on muslim immigrants far more than even the US shit on immigrants. French racism is pretty bad. Compare your country's controversy over the burka to that in France, for one example.

If you live in Southern Nevada or Southern California or a numerous list of other places in the US the immigrant experience and lack of assimilation is in your face especially from lowest common denominator shitheads. I get like 10 percent of the argument. If you're going to live in a country you should at least make an effort to be moderately able to speak the language. If I lived in Mexico or Panama or Ecuador I couldn't promise fluency but I'd make an effort. But I DO appreciate and have no issue with maintaining your culture and heritage. I'm the better for having a better exposure to Mexicans and their culture.

Immigrants not assimilating is only one part, the other part is they want us to change laws to suit them as well. I mean Muslims want to practice Sharia Law here.

I very much doubt it's a significant number of immigrants in Canada or the US who want to be able to practice Sharia Law. You sound like a Fox News sound bite. And even if they do the response should be something like "LOL, too bad. Fuck off." I'd like to be able to immigrate to Hungary and fuck all their women but that's not going to happen either.

[Joe K]

The immigrant experience, and the variety of choice of immigrant experience, is quite different in the UK, France and other countries than in North America. Frankly, the English and the French shit on muslim immigrants far more than even the US shit on immigrants. French racism is pretty bad. Compare your country's controversy over the burka to that in France, for one example.

If you live in Southern Nevada or Southern California or a numerous list of other places in the US the immigrant experience and lack of assimilation is in your face especially from lowest common denominator shitheads. I get like 10 percent of the argument. If you're going to live in a country you should at least make an effort to be moderately able to speak the language. If I lived in Mexico or Panama or Ecuador I couldn't promise fluency but I'd make an effort. But I DO appreciate and have no issue with maintaining your culture and heritage. I'm the better for having a better exposure to Mexicans and their culture.

Immigrants not assimilating is only one part, the other part is they want us to change laws to suit them as well. I mean Muslims want to practice Sharia Law here.

I very much doubt it's a significant number of immigrants in Canada or the US who want to be able to practice Sharia Law. You sound like a Fox News sound bite. And even if they do the response should be something like "LOL, too bad. Fuck off." I'd like to be able to immigrate to Hungary and fuck all their women but that's not going to happen either.

And what does it even mean to say that they want to "practice Sharia Law"? There's a huge difference between saying that an immigrant wants to live their life according to the tenets of their religious texts (which is true of many observant people of other faiths, like Mormons, Jews, etc.) and saying that an immigrant only recognizes Sharia as a legitimate source of law and doesn't believe they should have to follow the laws of Canada or the US.

[degenerasian]

Theyve tried to set up sharia courts here in canada. Both Ontario and Quebec have had to pass laws outlawing it.

What would that even mean? For example a women would not be allowed to divorce even though she lived in Canada

[brian]

Theyve tried to set up sharia courts here in canada. Both Ontario and Quebec have had to pass laws outlawing it.

What would that even mean? For example a women would not be allowed to divorce even though she lived in Canada

OK, but even in fairly liberal Canada they said "this is stupid". Life goes on. If the immigrants who want those allowances don't like it they can move to Afghanistan or some other similarly enlightened state. I don't see what the issue is.

[bfj]

Theyve tried to set up sharia courts here in canada. Both Ontario and Quebec have had to pass laws outlawing it.

What would that even mean? For example a women would not be allowed to divorce even though she lived in Canada

Legally they could, religiously they couldn't. Orthodox Jews do this. They must be granted a "Get" in order to be divorced, even if a court grants them a divorce. Meaning a woman who has a husband who won't agree to a Get, can't get remarried in the Orthodox faith.

[Gunpowder]

People on my FB are upset now that we are letting France do France's work. France got attacked, the fuck do we have to go in right now?