Paris 2

Written By: - Date published: 9:35 am, November 15th, 2015 - 203 comments
Categories: Europe, Syria, war - Tags: , ,

We now have reasonable detail on what happened in Paris yesterday.

The Guardian is live blogging events on day 2.

From Hollande’s reaction it seems likely that the terrorists will accomplish their goal:

Paris terror attacks: Hollande says Isis atrocity was ‘act of war’

Hollande described the attacks as cowardly and “an act of war” that had been carefully “prepared, organised and planned from outside the country by Islamic State, but with help from inside”. The president added: “We will be merciless toward the barbarians of Islamic State group. Faced with war, the country must take appropriate action.” But he but did not say what form that action might take.

203 comments on “Paris 2 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tc 1
    15 November 2015 at 10:12 am

    MSM framing will be interesting. Saw TVNZ immediately jump on the US syrian bandwagon with an almost smiling Boyed on Q&A.

    They also took the opportunity to defer normal sat evening viewing to cover it when updates through the evening would have been more then enough given a) lack of known verifiable facts which evolve over the hours and b) we have access to better sources dedicated to news.

  2. maui 2
    15 November 2015 at 10:22 am

    Hollandes statement is scary, he sounds like a crazed warlord, or another George Bush. That’s the kind of thing you would say if you weren’t interested in finding a solution to terrorism.

    • Psycho Milt 2.1
      15 November 2015 at 10:34 am

      Actually, he sounds like someone who has to respond to an attack on his capital city that’s left a lot of people dead. People tend to get grumpy when you do that.

      • proud poppy wearer 2.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 10:49 am

        Well said.

      • maui 2.1.2
        15 November 2015 at 10:52 am

        He could do a poll on Parisians, do you want thousands of dead people in Iraq in bombing runs? Will this make you feel better?

      • Daniel Cale 2.1.3
        15 November 2015 at 2:04 pm

        Amen to that PM. Appeasement worked really well for Chamberlain eh?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.3.1
          15 November 2015 at 3:14 pm

          Just as “the war on terror” has “worked really well”. If Chamberlain’s government had spent decades arming and supporting Herr Hitler the way the “West” has Saddam and that opthalmologist, I guess you’d have a point.

          Sadly, all you have is your knee, jerking.

          • Henry Filth 2.1.3.1.1
            16 November 2015 at 2:10 am

            The US war on terror might have worked. No repeats of September 11 IN THE USA.

            Plenty of action elsewhere though.

          • Daniel Cale 2.1.3.1.2
            16 November 2015 at 4:36 am

            How do you know whether the WoT has worked? You really have no idea how many attacks have been thwarted. Most likely many.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.3.1.2.1
              16 November 2015 at 8:09 am

              You’re measuring success by the body count of US citizens? Why on Earth would anyone accept such a ridiculous racist metric?

              • Grindlebottom …
                16 November 2015 at 9:48 am

                I see his point. You can argue it’s worked for the US in the US. There’ve been a few terrorist incidents (Boston Bombing springs to mind) but several plots have been uncovered & foiled & there’s been nothing like 9/11 since the WoT was announced. I was someone who was actually expecting more AQ attacks in the US, big ones, to follow 9/11.

                But AQ’s achieved many of its aims, Henry. The US has made itself even more hated in so many Islamic countries & communities. It’s spent an absolute fortune on homeland security, on the invasions & occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, in their air-strikes, in arming puppet governments & allies, all in the name of the WoT. It’s been over 14 years now since Bush announced the WoT. It clearly hasn’t won the WoT. Nowhere near it.

                It’s become a police state in many respects, with mass surveillance, an incredible proliferation of internal policing, intelligence, and security agencies, and now spillover from the arms industry into increasing militarisation of city and state police departments from army surplus materiel. (That’s all feeding a homegrown anti-government/conspiracy movement with a few “loopies” who need watching too.)

                Bin Laden would probably be pretty happy with how things have turned out I reckon.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  16 November 2015 at 10:03 am

                  several plots have been uncovered & foiled

                  You mean the ones the FBI conceived and commissioned?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      16 November 2015 at 1:12 pm

                      This from Human Rights Watch

                      In the case of the “Newburgh Four,” for example, who were accused of planning to blow up synagogues and attack a US military base, a judge said the government “came up with the crime, provided the means, and removed all relevant obstacles,” and had, in the process, made a terrorist out of a man “whose buffoonery is positively Shakespearean in scope.”

                      The FBI often targeted particularly vulnerable people, including those with intellectual and mental disabilities and the indigent. The government, often acting through informants, then actively developed the plot, persuading and sometimes pressuring the targets to participate, and provided the resources to carry it out.

                    • Grindlebottom …
                      16 November 2015 at 1:22 pm

                      Fair enough, thanks for the link. Very interesting & doesn’t surprise me OAB.

                      But in answer to your question, No, I meant these ones:
                      Many prosecutions have properly targeted individuals engaged in planning or financing terror attacks, the groups found.

                      Not these ones:
                      …But many others have targeted people who do not appear to have been involved in terrorist plotting or financing at the time the government began to investigate them. And many of the cases involve due process violations and abusive conditions of confinement that have resulted in excessively long prison sentences.

        • Craig H 2.1.3.2
          15 November 2015 at 3:15 pm

          Appeasement worked really well for the UK, Chamberlain less so. Appeasement meant the UK had time to build up their armed forces, particularly the RAF, which meant that they were able to win the Battle of Britain.

          • Colonial Viper 2.1.3.2.1
            15 November 2015 at 6:59 pm

            it gave Russia time to build up forces against Germany too.

          • Daniel Cale 2.1.3.2.2
            16 November 2015 at 4:37 am

            Nonsense. Britain did nothing because of Chamberlains incompetence. And the BoB took place 1-2 years into the war.

      • McFlock 2.1.4
        15 November 2015 at 4:26 pm

        yes, people do tend to get grumpy when you attack civilians in their cities. Sometimes they even feel an urge to respond in kind.

        Sometimes they even go so far as to attack theatres.

        An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind (except that last dude, who has one eye but manages to avoid all the blind people who want to take it, but then he lives a pretty shitty existence anyway).

    • Mike the Savage One 2.2
      15 November 2015 at 9:05 pm

      I think Hollande was shitting himself, as bombs went off outside the Stade de France, while he was in there, as I understand it.

      If suicide bombers, sadly a regular occurrence in places like Baghdad and a fair few other places in the Middle East, can get to the entrances of a large football stadium, and also cause massacres in other places in Central Paris, they may be able to get close to state leaders too one day.

      This is what I think, Hollande was shit scared, and his tough talk is what he did in anger, to recompense his inner insecurity. He does not look like a fighter sort of guy to me, so he seems to get “strength” by talking tough and sending France’s soldiers out onto the streets and also off-shore.

      He has not had great poll ratings either, so with elections due soon, he may also have that in mind, needing to ensure he catches the mood of the shocked and angry population, appearing vote-able.

      We have a PM here, who is rather good at doing that same kind of tough talk, e.g. Christmas Island “crims” and the ranting in Parliament calling the opposition to get some “guts” when the discussion raged about sending trainers to Iraq.

  3. Tory 3
    15 November 2015 at 10:26 am

    Maui, how about you, Russell Norman, Kelvin Davis, Andrew Little and the other apologists arrange a meeting with ISIS and see if you can’t nut out a solution? Take your own orange boiler suits as they look real good in the home made video you will no doubt appear in…….

    • dv 3.1
      15 November 2015 at 10:30 am

      Why don’t you take a few mates with some a k47 and sort it out with ISIS

    • ankerawshark 3.2
      15 November 2015 at 10:42 am

      Tory @ 3, that is a truly nasty comment.

    • maui 3.3
      15 November 2015 at 10:42 am

      I’m not that interested in sorting out the shit your ideology has left the world in. I’m sure your Revenge Party has all the answers…

      • proud poppy wearer 3.3.1
        15 November 2015 at 10:53 am

        “your ideology”

        What leftist liberal apologist drivel, yet when religious fanatics who take murderous actions because their 6th century prophet has been somehow insulted your first instinct is to blame the ‘great western satan’ .

        • maui 3.3.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 12:02 pm

          What a hypocrite, where has your outrage been while millions of innocents hace died in arab countries year after year. Not a peep, what a hero. Full of pride in hatred I’m sure.

          • proud poppy wearer 3.3.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 12:11 pm

            I beg your pardon – i have been very vocal about the shambles in the middle east over the years.

            [deleted. You are starting to annoy and offend. Chill it down – MS]

    • b waghorn 3.4
      15 November 2015 at 10:43 am

      Can you put up some proof that Little has been an apologist for Isis.

      • srylands 3.4.1
        15 November 2015 at 10:50 am

        Can you put up some proof that he supports all efforts to track down and kill them, and that all the resources of the New Zealand Defence Forces should be deployed to support such an effort?

        Can you put up some proof that he has urged the Government to support, through our membership of the UN Security Council, the formation of a military alliance to track down and kill them, with New Zealand playing a full role in such an effort?

        No? Didn’t think so. An apologist.

        • te reo putake 3.4.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 10:55 am

          Apparently you don’t know what the word ‘apologist’ means, srylands. Perhaps you should look it up. Check out ‘false equivalence’ at the same time.

        • Paul 3.4.1.2
          15 November 2015 at 11:23 am

          No one ( apart from a tiny amount of extremists ) is an apologist for ISIS.
          Military intervention may not be the best solution.
          Suggesting alternative policies to bombing and invading does not equate to being an apologist. Indeed, it could be argued that bombing and invading the Middle East is exactly the sort of policy that will inflame the issue further and thereby will help, not hinder , ISIS . The invasion of Iraq in 2003 did not make the U.S.or the UK safer; quite the contrary.

          Please stop trying to politicise the issue.
          This is too important an issue for trolling.
          It demeans the debate and it demeans you.

        • b waghorn 3.4.1.3
          15 November 2015 at 11:37 am

          Oh I know we could send some trainers to a camp in a desert, it won’t achieve anything other than prove the the ” leader ” doing it is a gutless little toady that’s having a bob each way.

        • Pascals bookie 3.4.1.4
          15 November 2015 at 4:19 pm

          “Can you put up some proof that Key supports all efforts to track down and kill them, and that all the resources of the New Zealand Defence Forces should be deployed to support such an effort?

          Can you put up some proof that he has urged the Government to support, through our membership of the UN Security Council, the formation of a military alliance to track down and kill them, with New Zealand playing a full role in such an effort?

          No? Didn’t think so. An apologist.”

        • Tricledrown 3.4.1.5
          15 November 2015 at 11:57 pm

          The NZ Defence forces are a Joke if not for the previous Labour govt buying several billion dollars on new equipment they would be a bigger joke.
          National have cut Defence force spending since 2008.
          As National ran down the Defence during the 1990s to where it was barely functioning.
          Soldiers have been killed because of National penny pinching Austerity.
          National are big on words poor on delivery

    • joe90 3.5
      15 November 2015 at 11:02 am

      Oh look, Tory is cooperating.
      /

      Iyad El-Baghdadi
      ‏@iyad_elbaghdadi

      ISIS’s goal from their own publication. A black & white world. What they call “grayzone” is our coexistence zone

      https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665337881351729152

    • Dialey 3.6
      15 November 2015 at 2:09 pm

      “La paix est le seul combat qui vaille d’être mené. Ce n’est plus une prière, mais un ordre qui doit monter des peuples vers les gouvernements, l’ordre de choisir définitivement entre l’enfer et la raison” (Albert Camus)
      Peace is the only battle worth being pursued. It is no longer a prayer, but an order the people must give to the governments, the order to choose once and for all between hell and reason/right.

      Excuse my rusty translation, but the sentiment is as valid now as when Camus was writing during the French Algerian troubles.

    • mikesh 3.7
      15 November 2015 at 3:37 pm

      We already know the solution. Americans, French, British, Russians and Isrealis should get the hell out of the middle east and leave the middle easterners to sort out their own problems.

      • You_Fool 3.7.1
        16 November 2015 at 8:17 am

        Unfortunately, due to outside influence (most notably, USA, UK, France & Russia) that is no longer a plausible solution if you care about the well-being of the majority of people. Due to the outside influence extremist groups which mean harm to everyone who don’t think exactly the same as them have the most power.

        Of course our continual activity in the area continue to strengthen the extremists as well; so without the invent of time travel, we are caught int a catch 22 about what to do. The minimum we should do is open our doors to refugees who are fleeing the troubles of their homeland and welcome them into our society.

  4. Tory 4
    15 November 2015 at 10:32 am

    I fully support NZ military action in the Middle East

    • RedBaronCV 4.1
      15 November 2015 at 10:41 am

      I don’t support the miliotary in Iraq and Key needs to think again.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2
      15 November 2015 at 10:44 am

      People like you are the problem: the Middle East has wingnut racists too.

    • Paul 4.3
      15 November 2015 at 10:57 am

      Do you think we would have reached this stage if the US and the UK, under Blair and. Bush, had not been in favour of military action in the Middle East ( Iraq) in 2003?
      What is happening are the unintended, yet predictable consequences of such actions. I do not believe an extremist group like ISIS could have attracted so many adherents without the military action of the West in 2003.

      And what to do now?
      Think first. ISIS want a knee jerk reaction.
      These are dangerous times and we need leaders who think calmly and rationally.
      More invasions may not be the best way to protect the citizens of France and other countries.

      I believe everyone ( outside of the extremists )wants a solution that ensures the safety of our citizens without destroying our freedoms.

      • proud poppy wearer 4.3.1
        15 November 2015 at 11:36 am

        Please stop trying to politicise the issue.
        This is too important an issue for trolling.
        It demeans the debate and it demeans you.

        • Paul 4.3.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 11:39 am

          I give up with you trolls.

          • proud poppy wearer 4.3.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 12:13 pm

            Don’t give up on yourself Paul.

            You might have your own road to Damascus moment.

            • Colonial Viper 4.3.1.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 1:15 pm

              military action is simplyvan extension of political action. Dont you understand anything?

            • Stuart Munro 4.3.1.1.1.2
              15 November 2015 at 6:57 pm

              I think Damascus is a bit big a problem for us to resolve at the moment. Better we are helpful on the fringes than going downtown & making a mess like Iraq.

        • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1.2
          15 November 2015 at 1:05 pm

          It’s a political action. The problem we have is you war mongers trying to shut down the debate about how we should react. You just want to go in guns blazing which is what caused the problem in the first place.

          The second place was the US funding and supporting ISIS to take down Assad.

          The only solution that you RWNJs ever see is more guns.

          • b waghorn 4.3.1.2.1
            15 November 2015 at 1:23 pm

            I’m for less guns but in this situation there needs to be a targeted removal of the cancer that is Isis .
            I would prefer bagdaddi in a court of law but I suspect that like bin laden there will be people who won’t want the truth tho come out.

          • proud poppy wearer 4.3.1.2.2
            15 November 2015 at 1:31 pm

            The only solution you have is to spout RWNJs and print some money.

            • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1.2.2.1
              15 November 2015 at 3:01 pm

              No, the only solution I think will work is the West getting out of the ME and leave them to it. They’ll sort themselves out one way or another.

              • b waghorn …
                15 November 2015 at 4:55 pm

                While hindsight says that the middle east was a more stable place when Saddam and al Assad where in control ,is likely Isis would stop if the west pulled out now . and is it ethical since the west created the chaos that is there now to leave the innocents in that region to there fate at the hands of Isis.?

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  15 November 2015 at 6:21 pm

                  While hindsight says that the middle east was a more stable place when Saddam and al Assad where in control ,is likely Isis would stop if the west pulled out now .

                  If the West hadn’t gone into Iraq and Afghanistan then it’s unlikely that ISIS would exist now. Of course, the West did go in and even trained up ISIS until they turned and bit.

                  and is it ethical since the west created the chaos that is there now to leave the innocents in that region to there fate at the hands of Isis.?

                  Yes, the West created the chaos but even more meddling will create more chaos.

                  Of course, why did the West going in in the first place? And that, IMO, comes down to the resources that the ME has and that the West need to maintain their present level of living.

                  • Grindlebottom …
                    15 November 2015 at 6:40 pm

                    Oil, gas, and the Suez Canal are probably the only real reasons the West has taken any interest in the Middle East over the last century.

                    I’m pondering your suggestion the West should just get out and leave them to sort themselves out. Given the 80/20 Sunni/Shia & ethnic splits it could be a massacre, but they might all end up redrawing the borders that the Western Nations put in place after the Ottoman collapse and end up living happily in separate areas and just spitting insults from time to time. Who knows?

                    Bet the Chinese and Russians would be in there in a flash though, looking to fill the vacuum and utilise the same resources. Wonder how that would pan out in the long run?

                    Can’t see the US agreeing to it because Israel would probably be a gonner unless prepared to use its nukes.

                    • GregJ …
                      15 November 2015 at 9:25 pm

                      Oil, gas, and the Suez Canal are probably the only real reasons the West has taken any interest in the Middle East over the last century.

                      Britain is just about to mark 200 years involvement (interference?) in the Persian/Arabian Gulf – its interest preceded all three of the above – driven by its trade empire in India, the NW Frontier against Russia and as a line of communication back to London.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      15 November 2015 at 9:50 pm

                      Bet the Chinese and Russians would be in there in a flash though, looking to fill the vacuum and utilise the same resources. Wonder how that would pan out in the long run?

                      We’d have to have an agreement that they’d stay out as well. As it stands, I don’t expect either side to as both sides want the resources. Even if such an agreement was reached we’d soon see both sides clandestinely supporting war.

                      Can’t see the US agreeing to it because Israel would probably be a gonner unless prepared to use its nukes.

                      That’s pretty much inevitable already. Just the time to pass for it to become real – Israel was lost 2000+ years ago and no matter how much the psychopaths want to resurrect it all they’re ever going to get is an undead zombie.

                • Tricledrown …
                  16 November 2015 at 12:00 am

                  Gadaffi

        • McFlock 4.3.1.3
          15 November 2015 at 4:28 pm

          War is the extension of politics by other means.

      • Matthew Hooton 4.3.2
        15 November 2015 at 6:48 pm

        If you think 2003 was the major cause of Friday night, what caused 9/11 in 2001?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 4.3.2.1
          15 November 2015 at 6:53 pm

          Bigots and wingnuts from Saudi Arabia can speak for themselves.

          The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.

          I couldn’t forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy.

          These craven excuses and total lack of personal responsibility remind you of anyone?

          • Matthew Hooton 4.3.2.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 7:01 pm

            And what caused the Israelis to begin military operations in southern Lebanon in 1982?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 4.3.2.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 7:05 pm

              Bigots and wingnuts exhibiting zero personal responsibility, I expect.

            • weka 4.3.2.1.1.2
              15 November 2015 at 7:18 pm

              “And what caused the Israelis to begin military operations in southern Lebanon in 1982?”

              I blame the patriarchy. Go back far enough and you can see where the trouble started.

            • Tricledrown 4.3.2.1.1.3
              16 November 2015 at 12:03 am

              The palestinian Arabs who had been ethnically cleansed from Israel.

        • Colonial Viper 4.3.2.2
          15 November 2015 at 6:56 pm

          The CIA training and arming Osama Bin Laden and his Islamist Mujahadeen in assymetric guerrilla warfare aimed at taking down a superpower.

        • Stuart Munro 4.3.2.3
          15 November 2015 at 6:59 pm

          Bin Laden explained that. Beirut.

        • Poission 4.3.2.4
          15 November 2015 at 8:22 pm

          what caused 9/11 in 2001?

          What caused 9/11 in 1683.?

        • Tricledrown 4.3.2.5
          16 November 2015 at 12:48 am

          The US backing of Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Arabs from Israel.

          • Matthew Hooton 4.3.2.5.1
            16 November 2015 at 8:28 am

            Not very effective ethnic cleansing with over 20% of Israelis are Palestinian Arabs. Israel usually has a reputation for more ruthless efficiency that this suggests. Are you sure “ethnic cleansing” is the phrase you’re looking for?

    • Gangnam Style 4.4
      15 November 2015 at 12:13 pm

      Until those NZ ‘war heroes’ are put into Australian detention centres then they are ‘murderers & rapists’. Must be nice to live in such a black & white world. & the NZ Muslim Association has condemned the violence you fucking egg.

    • DoublePlusGood 4.5
      15 November 2015 at 12:24 pm

      What exactly do you think it is going to achieve?

    • b waghorn 4.6
      15 November 2015 at 12:24 pm

      I fully support nz military action in the middle east if it comes under a un mandate. The yanks and the poms have had there go and they have failed.

    • humPrac 4.7
      15 November 2015 at 3:56 pm

      Or soldiers need to be on our soil protecting us. If our soldiers are overseas, it opens us up for attack.

    • Colonial Viper 4.8
      15 November 2015 at 5:04 pm

      “I fully support NZ military action in the Middle East”

      Let us know when you get back.

      • Grindlebottom 4.8.1
        15 November 2015 at 5:29 pm

        The government doesn’t like you going off on your own. They get pretty sniffy at the border and want to know about your religion and ancestry and stuff I think.

  5. Foreign Waka 5
    15 November 2015 at 10:49 am

    One has to understand that firstly, the investigation of what has happened is still ongoing and whilst a terror attack from ISIS is reasonable to assume, it is an assumption. Let ‘s not forget, whilst Europe has been overrun with refugees there is also a very real political interest to have the pendulum pointing to the far right.
    As to the perpetrators, they could also be African in origin as France has had more connections politically as well as its immigration population from that continent.
    The latest news show that one of the terrorists was one of their own.
    One has to wonder how “marbled” the potential terror groups are now spread among the European states. This is the real treat, the not knowing and overreaction with totalitarian control which in time would divide any nation. And the say “divide and conquer”.

    • proud poppy wearer 5.1
      15 November 2015 at 10:55 am

      No the real threat is radical islamist fanatics, i’m sure the vast amount of refugees seeking to get into Europe would agree.

      • Paul 5.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 11:04 am

        And what is the best solution to drying up the source of volunteers?
        Perpetual war in. Iraq , Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and Yemen has just created more people willing to martyr themselves .

        • proud poppy wearer 5.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 11:10 am

          Well a good start would be forthright condemnation from all muslim religious authorities of any and all types of violence in the name of the Islamic religion.

          • OneTrack 5.1.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 11:22 am

            While we are waiting for that to happen, maybe we need a second plan?

          • Paul 5.1.1.1.2
            15 November 2015 at 11:28 am

            OK.
            And what actions by Western governments would best dry up ISIS’s recruits ?
            More bombing ?
            More invasions?

            Another Iraq ?
            Another Afghanistan ?
            Another Libya ?
            Another Yemen ?
            Another Syria ?

            Intervening in other countries has worked well so far.

            • Reddelusion 5.1.1.1.2.1
              15 November 2015 at 11:47 am

              Paul you seem to think all would be rosy in the middle east if none of above would have happened, just like staying out of rawanda did a fat lot of good What is, is what is and we need to deal with it, if your peanut brain can’t comprehend this , stay out of the debate 😀

              • DoublePlusGood …
                15 November 2015 at 12:38 pm

                Things weren’t flash in the Middle East with Assad and Hussein running dictatorships, but it’s sure as hell a lot better than what has happened since the West charged on in and destabilised everything and created a fertile breeding ground for militancy.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                15 November 2015 at 3:41 pm

                Rwanda was ruled first by Germany, then Belgium (!) for the greater part of the 20thC. So much for “staying out”.

                • Reddelusion …
                  15 November 2015 at 6:07 pm

                  I am referring to the world standing back and not intervening in the genocide, not colonial history

                  • McFlock …
                    15 November 2015 at 6:31 pm

                    Intervening like in Somalia?

                    • Reddelusion …
                      15 November 2015 at 10:21 pm

                      Are you suggesting that the non intervention in rawanda was a good idea

                    • McFlock …
                      15 November 2015 at 11:00 pm

                      I suspect that non-intervention was a better option than any intervention you’re envisioning.

                      Oh, there are many more subtle interventions that could have been done (such as jamming the public radio stations), and the UN failed comprehensively, but unilateally just bombing the crap out of all and sundry, or turning it into a boots on the ground quagmire, would just have kept central africa as fucked as the middle east is now. Central africe is still pretty fucked, but not nearly so bad as ME.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1.1.1.3
            15 November 2015 at 12:45 pm

            Which has already happened, many times.

          • mac1 5.1.1.1.4
            15 November 2015 at 2:31 pm

            So, who in the so-called Christian world listened to these words?

            POPE FRANCIS
            September 7, 2013

            “Forgiveness, dialogue, reconciliation – these are the words of peace, in beloved Syria, in the Middle East, in all the world”

            Months later, during his historic visit to the Holy Land, the Pope denounced the causes that fuel war around the world as well as in the Middle East.

            May 24, 2014
            “These are roots of all evil, hatred and greed, for money, for the construction and for the sale of weapons. This should make us all think, who is behind it all?”

      • Foreign waka 5.1.2
        15 November 2015 at 12:00 pm

        It is confirmed: ISIS took responsibility. The crime was perpetrated with citizens of France and Brussels, Passports are being traced to refugees coming via Greece.

        Yes, the radical Islamist are the threath and wouldn’t Europe not know that! After 100’s of years of defense against that threat, they know that they did not emerge just now.
        The flames of old have been fanned again a long time ago and despite the mainland European warnings, having experience of the Islamic desire to conquer the continent, it went on deaf ears of the anglo saxen group taking the war to the middle east (Iran, Irak etc).
        The refugees entering Europe are numbering hundreds of thousands and there are clearly not enough resources to provide. This is a problem as a few years from now you have all these people believing that Europe will give them a “better” life but it WILL NOT HAPPEN and giving the radicals even more ammunition.
        After that , its anybody’s guess.

        • DoublePlusGood 5.1.2.1
          15 November 2015 at 12:26 pm

          “100s of years of defense against that threat” – you mean, centuries of crusades and occupations of the middle east, pissing off Muslims as much as possible and giving them plenty of cause to hate the West, right?

          • Richard Christie 5.1.2.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 2:07 pm

            you mean, centuries of …

            No, it worked both ways, the Turks were once at the doors of Vienna and a thousand years before that the Moors marched on Tours in France.

            Don’t buy into historical “they/we started it” , it is counterproductive.

            • Macro 5.1.2.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 3:11 pm

              Don’t buy into historical “they/we started it” , it is counterproductive.

              QFT
              Religious fanaticism fueled by unthinking warmongering has been with us for millennia – it is still with us – and it exists on both sides.

  6. Reddelusion 6
    15 November 2015 at 11:04 am

    The left apologist seem to think radical Islam is new and its simply a factor of the last 20 years. it’s been there for 1400 years, they now simply have the means to spread and act on thier nut job ideology It needs to be tackled on all fronts and squashed militarily, financially and ideologically

    • Paul 6.1
      15 November 2015 at 11:30 am

      Too important an issue to be trolling .
      Don’t demean the debate and don’t demean yourself.

      • proud poppy wearer 6.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 11:32 am

        So everyone else is trolling and politicising this apart from you ?

        • galeandra 6.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 11:49 am

          Re-consider your avatar. The tragedies the poppy evokes resulted from the political failures of the past and you have no right to abrogate it to your own shallow purposes.
          As an addendum, reductio ad absurdem is no substitute for logic. Many voices of Islam have spoken out unflinchingly against the violence being perpetrated by adherents of daesh. It’s a point often missed that by far the majority of the victims of their violence have been muslim.

  7. johnm 7
    15 November 2015 at 11:14 am

    The Age of Despair: Reaping the Whirlwind of Western Support for Extremist Violence

    We, the West, overthrew Saddam by violence. We overthrew Gaddafi by violence. We are trying to overthrow Assad by violence. Harsh regimes all — but far less draconian than our Saudi allies, and other tyrannies around the world. What has been the result of these interventions? A hell on earth, one that grows wider and more virulent year after year.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/13/the-age-of-despair-reaping-the-whirlwind-of-western-support-for-extremist-violence/

    Hell Comes to Paris

    Years spent depicting head chopping fanatics as rebels, moderates, and revolutionaries in an effort to effect the toppling of yet another secular government in the Middle East. Years spent cultivating Saudi Arabia as an ally against extremism and fanaticism rather thantreating it as a country where extremism and fanaticism resides. Years spent treating the Assad government, Iran, and Russia as enemies rather than allies in the struggle against this fanaticism. And years spent denying any connection between a foreign policy underpinned by hubris and its inevitable blowback. All of this combined has succeeded in opening the gates of hell.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/13/hell-comes-to-paris/

    Plus Europe’s tacit support for the U$’s atrocities in the ME has produced the frightening and overwhelming refugee exodus. Also the U$ overthrew the democratic government of the Ukraine leading to a similar humanitarian disaster there which is answered by a military buildup against Russia that has sort a peaceful solution all along. The Neocon Zionist madmen are still in control in Warshington and may yet start WW111 which their planners believe can be won.

    • johnm 7.1
      15 November 2015 at 11:25 am

      Gerald Spezio Says:
      November 14th, 2015 at 2:38 pm

      The horrific bloodshed that occurred in France is sickening, but we do not know who did what or why.

      The propaganda, as always, is disgustingly distorted.

      The following facts are NOT in dispute.

      ONE MILLION INNOCENT Iraqis have been murdered in cold blood by U.S. & Brit military murderers with tens of thousands more maimed.

      All this bloodthirsty vicious murder of innocent Iraqi People is NOW CAVALIERLY BLOWN OFF AS AN ERROR IN INTELLIGENCE GATHERING.

      Oops, tough shit!

      Displaced, homeless, & in-shock-&-living-in-hovels Iraqis total at least FOUR MILLION.

      Libyans murdered are estimated at at least 20 to 25 thousand.

      Innocent Syrians murdered total at least 250,000.

      Israel started it all this mayhem & murder in the name of the Lawd Gawd of Abraham more than 80 years ago by invading Palestine – murdering the native Palestinians, stealing their homeland, & herding the survivors into squalid concentration camps.

      The cultured Israelis continue murdering the surviving Palestinians to
      this very day with billions in aid every year from the bought U.S. representative government.

      Netanyahu openly screams for MORE of this murdering horror for the Iranian People.

      Keep your freakin eyes of the ball, or you will never catch it.

      http://guymcpherson.com/2015/11/the-worsening-spectre-of-global-dimming-a-new-interview-with-dr-mcpherson/#comments

      • proud poppy wearer 7.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 11:31 am

        Islamist fanatics existed before the formation of modern Israel and would continue their vile practices and slaughter of anyone not deemed of their creed if Israel ceased to exist.

        • KJT 7.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 11:56 am

          Christian fanatics murdering Muslims, started long before Israel. (The Crusades I believe) and have continued until the present day with the invasion of Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Aided by Muslim fanatics from Saudi Arabia.

          • Kev 7.1.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 12:01 pm

            The Crusades were in response to Muslim invasions.

            • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 5:07 pm

              yes because the French and the English thought that the Middle East belonged to them. Maybe they still do.

              • Grindlebottom …
                15 November 2015 at 5:24 pm

                Well, they had an issue that the christians were there before the muslims rushed out from Arabia & took over all over the place, to be fair. They’d spread all over the place by 600CE. They kind of thought they were just taking it back. It was one of those hey we were here first things you get so much of in human history.

              • GregJ …
                15 November 2015 at 9:46 pm

                Not really – that’s a distortion caused by focusing too much on western, Latin sources.

                As fellow Christians (despite the Great Schism of 1054) they responded to the request of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Emperor Alexios I Komnenos to help re-conquer Anatolia following the collapse of the Seljuk Turk Sultanate of Rum. The Byzantine military strength had been severely constrained by the loss of the Anatolian recruiting grounds following the defeat at Manzikert (Komnenos army was a motley mix of Frankish & Pecheneg (Steppe) mercenaries with some Greek infantry) – he needed large scale Western help. To a degree it worked and the Byzantines retook Chios, Rhodes, Smyrna, Ephesus, & Sardis along the Anatolian coast. However like all genies once he opened the bottle he soon lost control as more and more Westerners turned up (for a whole variety of reasons)…

                • Grindlebottom …
                  16 November 2015 at 11:24 am

                  You may be correct, I’m not going to debate which versions of crusader history are the more accurate as it would take too much research I’m not interested in doing at the moment, but if you go back into the history of the expansion of Islam you’ll note that it spread into what are now regarded as muslim lands primarily by military invasion, the conquering, and sometimes re-conquering of those lands and peoples – crusades. Conversion to Islam was often forced and certainly the safest option for anyone other than a Christian or Jew, who themselves were usually tolerated but sometimes persecuted and killed in pogroms or the due to policies of less tolerant Caliphs. I’m only trying to say crusades were not solely a feature of Christendom.

          • Reddelusion 7.1.1.1.2
            15 November 2015 at 1:05 pm

            with a 500 year hiatus when the ottermans decided to fk over their Muslim world themselves, while also having a good crack at Western and Eastern Europe to boot. the Middle East has always required some form of stabilising power be it an empire or dictators, transition has always resulted in chaos Suggest you stay in the now and deal with the fanatics at hand

    • johnm 7.2
      15 November 2015 at 12:00 pm

      We Are All France! Though We Are Never All Lebanon or Syria or Iraq!

      We are all France. Apparently. Though we are never all Lebanon or Syria or Iraq for some reason. Or a long, long list of additional places.

      We are led to believe that U.S. wars are not tolerated and cheered because of the color or culture of the people being bombed and occupied. But let a relatively tiny number of people be murdered in a white, Christian, Western-European land, with a pro-war government, and suddenly sympathy is the order of the day.

      “This is not just an attack on the French people, it is an attack on human decency and all things that we hold dear,” says U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham. I’m not sure I hold ALL the same things dear as the senator, but for the most part I think he’s exactly right and that sympathy damn well ought to be the order of the day following a horrific mass killing in France.

      I just think the same should apply to everywhere else on earth as well. The majority of deaths in all recent wars are civilian. The majority of civilians are not hard to sympathize with once superficial barriers are overcome. Yet, the U.S. media never seems to declare deaths in Yemen or Pakistan or Palestine to be attacks on our common humanity.

      http://www.countercurrents.org/swanson141115.htm

      • Reddelusion 7.2.1
        15 November 2015 at 1:09 pm

        Because Lebanon, Iraq Syria are countries in name only, yes the west is partly to blame for that but deliberating that point does not deal with situation at hand

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.2.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 1:14 pm

          Recent history is educational: anyone who proposes murder, whether by AK47s, suicide vests, military invasions, or drone strikes, is providing support for terrorism and should be dealt with.

          • Reddelusion 7.2.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 2:30 pm

            Can’t agree, you can’t apply the ethics of the individual to the democratic state, the former must make decision based on the collective good, thus justifying drone strikes to take out fanatics that threaten the free world

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.2.1.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 2:37 pm

              Except they don’t threaten the free world; you can no more have a war on freedom than you can a war on terror.

              I note your support for the National Party, which has done more in seven years to undermine the free press, human rights and the rule of law* in New Zealand than Daesh ever will.

              *cf: NZ Law Society warning to the UN.

              • Reddelusion …
                15 November 2015 at 3:13 pm

                Don’t really have a great like for national or politician in general, just dislike labour and the politicians who make up the left more

                above comment is a bit silly, just a losers narrative as was the rights nanny state re labour or how bias margret Wilson was as the speaker under labour, these narratives just go around and round, what has currency just depends on who is in power. comparing Nationsl to ISIL just makes you and the left looks silly,.These foot in mouth moments, mock outrage, ridiculous interpretations seem to be part and parcel of the left and really does it no favours in regard to the general public taking the left seriously. Makes for good entertainment though

            • McFlock 7.2.1.1.1.2
              15 November 2015 at 4:38 pm

              Assuming you mixed up “former” with “latter” (“individuals must make decisions based on the collective good” is the meaning of what you actually wrote), why is it that states must make decisions based on the collective good when it comes to bombing foreigners, yet domestic issues of collective good like democratic resource management (ECAN, anyone?)) or progressive taxation are contrary to the behaviour of the government you support?

              This seems to be a bit inconsistent of you.

              • Reddelusion …
                15 November 2015 at 5:10 pm

                I do get mixed up with former and latter, another fault on top of been a RWNJ 😀

                In regard to your comment, I think both left and right have the same desired outcome but disagree on the method to get there, not that utopia is ever achieved, second best at best. I could apply your arguement to many failed left governments, thus I think it does not fit the debate between the morality of the state vs the individual. A more similar analogy is the arguement over the unborn child and the mother, or a life raft with to many people on board for all to survive , or a man asleep on a rail way track, who will stop and be kill by an oncoming train full of children that will go over a cliff if you wake and save him by calling his cell phone and , (what do you do ) a state must make such decisions

                • McFlock …
                  15 November 2015 at 5:26 pm

                  The flaw with the pure utilitarianism you (apparently – your comment is a bit convoluted) espouse is that in some fringe examples it seeks to preserve humanity by destroying that part of us which makes us human.

                  But that is still beside my original point: if you really did feel that states should act purely for the greater good without qualm, then you’d be backing high tax rates for the rich, an elimination of GST, and intensive enforcement of environmental standards from aquafer management to atmospheric discharges. You’d be arguing that this should be done to put more money into preventative social services from the cradle to the grave and so that our crime and disease burdens were dramatically reduced, saving the country billions in the long run.

                  If state-centric utilitarianism is your justification for bombing civilians in the middle east, why don’t you follow through with it at home?

                  • Reddelusion …
                    15 November 2015 at 5:56 pm

                    mr flock you seem to think your policy prescriptions are objective absolutes of which they are not, for one A higher tax rate may result in job losses and a fall in gdp ( if Gini coefficient threshold breached), Most of what you put forward there are just as rationale economic arguement against, thus value judgements at best. The people decide each 3 years on the judgements they prefer

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      15 November 2015 at 6:07 pm

                      When Lab5 raised the minimum wage and the top tax rate, unemployment dropped to its lowest level since the 1970s, in direct contradiction of deeply held right wing thinks.

                      Learn some recent history and your lectures won’t be so pointless.

                    • McFlock …
                      15 November 2015 at 6:21 pm

                      Economic arguments as never rational. They are statements of belief, untestable and unsupportable, because any counter-examples (such as the one OAB put forward) are defended on the grounds of non-identical circumstances.

                      A “rational economic argument” is merely a religious statement about the way you want the world to be, not the way it actually is.

  9. Matthew Whitehead 9
    15 November 2015 at 11:48 am

    If France is really gearing up for full-on war on ISIS, I hope they’re prepared for this to be the new normal. We’ve seen that when Europe and the USA support occupations in countries with motivated terrorist bases that it either does nothing as recruitment keeps pace with casualties, or it actually gains terrorists momentum. Nobody seems to understand how to actually counter insurgencies anymore.

    God this thing is depressing from EVERY angle.

    • Reddelusion 9.1
      15 November 2015 at 1:07 pm

      Full scale asymmetrical war, I think the west has learnt its lesson re conventional war won’t work

      • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 1:17 pm

        Tell Wayne Mapp: he’s a little slow.

        • Reddelusion 9.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 2:31 pm

          I Don’t think nz could mount a conventional war even if it wanted to

          • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 3:06 pm

            i think we have enough ammo for about one week of full blown conflict.

            • Reddelusion 9.1.1.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 4:23 pm

              Lange told a good story when he questioned armed forces about intervening in Fiji, told in vey quick order not s good idea

              • Ad …
                15 November 2015 at 5:13 pm

                The NZ Generals were a bunch of softcocks who just needed to phone the Australian military and propose a coalition. Failing that Lange could have done the same. Would have saved a fair few further coups, and a massive step back in Fijian society and economy. It’s not always wrong to intervene militarily.

                Solomons and East Timor a great local counterfactuals.

            • alwyn 9.1.1.1.1.2
              15 November 2015 at 6:27 pm

              It is a shame that Bob Jones didn’t get into power with his New Zealand Party in 1984.
              I believe he proposed a defence budget of 20c. He said that would be enough to phone the invading leader and say “We surrender”.
              That was sufficient. Of course primarily he was only pointing out that nobody was going to bother invading us.

            • Stuart Munro 9.1.1.1.1.3
              15 November 2015 at 7:04 pm

              Watch the righties go mano a mano. Bring popcorn.

    • Chrys Berryman 9.2
      15 November 2015 at 1:39 pm

      …depressed hardly even begins to explain how Im feeling…..all I can see is a rise of the extreme right in Europe …..and in the meantime any hope of replacing the current
      narrative about how to deal with terrorism is gone…..an overreaction will occur….and more and more disconnected Muslim youths will join up…..who in their right mind decided that teenagers need to feel discomfort and alienation ….it toughens you up apparently,that full employment is a pipe dream,that poverty in the third world is unfixable….that a widening gap between rich and poor is a necessary evil ,that fixing the CAUSE of all this shit has nothing to do with us……

      • Foreign waka 9.2.1
        15 November 2015 at 3:19 pm

        Quite right, and on the ground where the real victims are, the mothers with the little children are being trampled on, ignored and sidelined. Everywhere. Because the war machine needs to be fed with the ever hungry crowd of the richest whose only concern is that they do not become the “other”.
        And it will be these children that grow up with a hardening of their hearts and uncompromising allegiance to get revenge that will keep feeding this circle until no one is left.

      • Reddelusion 9.2.2
        15 November 2015 at 4:31 pm

        Many good men and women haves lived in much more trying conditions than western jihadi Muslims and never reverted to the actions we saw in the weekend, likewise how does it explain all the good Muslim east and west who don’t revert to this barbarity, it’s a death cult simple as that and needs to be sorted, no different than all other nut bar cults that exist in all types of economic and social conditions, but far more dangerous, don’t make excuses or apologise for them

        • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2.2.1
          15 November 2015 at 5:07 pm

          Are we allowed to discuss reasons and causes, like MI5 saying right wing values (like racism) are part of the problem, without you accusing MI5 of making excuses?

          • Reddelusion 9.2.2.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 6:00 pm

            There’s a threshold when no reason or excuse can be justified

            But of course you can make them. Free speech

            • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2.2.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 6:03 pm

              Who said anything about justification, apart from you, pretending that there’s a threshold below which racism is ok?

            • Puddleglum 9.2.2.1.1.2
              15 November 2015 at 9:35 pm

              Hi Reddelusion,

              Explanations aren’t equivalent to justifications.

              The only explanations I keep hearing from people like yourself and (implicitly) Matthew Hooton, and others is that these people are just ‘fanatics’, ‘extremists’, ‘cultish’, ‘crazy’, ‘zealots’, etc..

              Sorry but those aren’t explanations – they’re just tautological placeholders where explanations should be (hint: why is someone a ‘zealot’, ‘fanatic’, etc.? And please don’t resort to personal pathology because we then have to ask why some individuals are ‘pathological’ but others aren’t).

              They’re tautological because they get us nowhere – ‘Why have they acted in such an extreme way?’ Ans: Because they’re ‘extremists’. Restating what is in need of explanation achieves nothing – least of all the ability to understand and, therefore, effectively counter and reduce the occurrence of these kinds of acts.

              Also, such pseudo-explanations are placeholders whose whole point seems to be to prevent explanations being sought.

              Apparently, the most moral posture to adopt in these circumstances is to steadfastly refuse to try to explain what’s going on and why.

              Anything else amounts to being an ‘apologist’ for brutality. Seeking to understand is taken as moral failure.

              Bizarre.

              • Reddelusion …
                15 November 2015 at 10:37 pm

                Hi Puddlegum

                Explanation these guys are a 1400 year old cult ( they are not new or a creation of the west) that now have the means to unleash mayhem, yes partly because of the west, irrespective they are a death cult and need to be snubbed out, end of story. No different than a David Koresh or a Jim jones simply more dangerous, these cults where happy to kill themselves not have every one submit to a 700AD desert dwellers ideology or die

                • Puddleglum …
                  16 November 2015 at 2:08 pm

                  Hi Reddelusion,

                  Thanks for the response – much appreciated.

                  Why does this cult now have the powerbase to do this? (E.g., why does it now have sufficient support in the areas ISIS currently occupies?)

                  Think of it in terms of human nature – brutality is clearly a potential expression of human nature but it arises only under certain conditions.

                  What are the conditions under which cults gain enough support to succeed as well as ISIS is currently?

                  To use another metaphor – I’m thinking less of the nature of bacteria and more of the conditions that create an agar plate for the reproduction and proliferation of bacteria.

  10. Bill 10
    15 November 2015 at 1:10 pm

    A while ago in ‘The Atlantic’ there was an article on Isis pointing out that according to them, any ‘true’ Muslim would make their way to the area of the Caliphate and, once there, would not leave as that would mean they were an apostate. So Isis is responsible for attacks in France or elsewhere – how?

    Meanwhile, at least one of the gunmen/bombers has been identified as French (born and raised there) – three others arrested in Belgium are French – one passport that may or may not have belonged to the person whose body it was found next to is Syrian.

    Hollande pronouncing that the Paris shootings and bombings are an act of war and a reason to redouble military action against the deash becomes awkward if the people carrying out attacks are French. It doesn’t matter if they identified with Isis. That can be no more reason to bomb and kill more people in Syria than it would be a reason to bomb people in Germany if the attackers had identified with Nazism.

    Hollande described the attacks as “cowardly” and “an act of war” that had been “prepared, organised and planned from outside the country by Islamic State, but with help from inside”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/14/syrian-greece-refugee-paris-attacks-killers

    Maybe politicians would be better served identifying why their fellow nationals go on murderous rampages in the name of foreign groups from a long way away.

    • b waghorn 10.1
      15 November 2015 at 1:18 pm

      “Maybe politicians would be better served identifying why their fellow nationals go on murderous rampages in the name of foreign groups from a long way away.”
      If there weren’t these toxic outside influences on the easily lead do you think there would still be these sort of attacks happening?

      • Bill 10.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 1:34 pm

        Are they any more ‘easily led’ than anyone else?

        The “it’s the evil Daesh so let’s bomb ‘over there'” is simple and avoids any need to look in the mirror. If the shooters and bombers self identified as nazis, would questions be asked if there was any contributory factors within society or their lives or their situations that led them or encouraged them to identify with that ideology? If so in that scenario, then why not in this one?

        And even if not, what’s with the call to bomb a far off place because of what ones own nationals have done?

        • b waghorn 10.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 2:04 pm

          “Are they any more ‘easily led’ than anyone else?”
          Probably not ,but as well as government s looking at ways to give these people a positive way of living the governments of these countries have to find a way of protecting them from evil influences .
          As for bombing its a blunt method that should only be used to take out opposition infrastructure IMO . Targeted special forces to go and get the main players would be my preferred option.

          • Colonial Viper 10.1.1.1.1
            15 November 2015 at 3:04 pm

            after years of drone strikes and special forces ops and kill lists, it shpuld be clear to all you can’t win in Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria, using just that.

            The Taleban are back in control of large tracts of Afghanistan, for instance.

            • b waghorn 10.1.1.1.1.1
              15 November 2015 at 3:31 pm

              The yanks should never have been in Afghanistan the us should of waited and watched and snatched bin laden and co .. And it is what France should do with the leaders of isis if a link to Isis is proved .

    • Puddleglum 10.2
      15 November 2015 at 9:47 pm

      Hi Bill,

      That article in The Atlantic got me thinking a while back too – so I wrote two posts about it; ‘On the very idea of ISIS – Part I‘ and ‘Part II‘.

      I think the posts touch on some of the questions you raise here, including why people in France might identify with ISIS.

      Good points/questions.

      • Bill 10.2.1
        16 November 2015 at 10:20 am

        Yup. Power.

        • Puddleglum 10.2.1.1
          16 November 2015 at 2:12 pm

          Yep bill. You summed it up in one word.

          I don’t know why I took so many words to make the same point😊

          • Bill 10.2.1.1.1
            16 November 2015 at 4:53 pm

            Well, even though I’ve been thinking along those lines, the good thing about your posts is the measured ‘step through’.

            I must admit I’m getting well fucked off with a lot of liberal commentary that would have us believe that Isis/isil/ daesh are some kind of octopus like ‘Pinky and the Brain’ phenomenon with cunning and calculating tentacles everywhere.

            How’s about disempowered, marginalised and fucked over people search to substitute their sense of powerlessness and hopelessness with anything that might restore them a sense of power? Degree of consequence aside, I can’t really see any difference in the basic drive that will have some people support – be dyed in the wool fans, followers or supporters of – for example, a successful football team, a religious cult, a political party or a political cult.

            Points on a continuum betraying a psychological ‘need’ to compensate for a sense of powerlessness.

            • Puddleglum 10.2.1.1.1.1
              16 November 2015 at 5:49 pm

              If we look at the two articles doing the rounds – Graeme Wood’s famous ‘What do ISIS Really Want?’ article in The Atlantic and Lydia Wilson’s ‘What I discovered from interviewing imprisoned ISIS Fighters‘ (Pascal’s bookie linked to this on another thread)- there’s a telling difference.

              Wood interviewed spokespeople for ISIS and, unsurprisingly, they claimed to be motivated by a particular reading of the Quran and the desire to establish a Caliphate, etc., etc..

              By contrast, Wilson interviewed actual recruits doing the fighting and, also unsurprisingly, the particular Islamic theology is barely understood let alone gets a mention. It’s all about what has happened to them and their families.

              My guess is that the ‘home grown’ ISIS supporters in Western countries are educated enough so that (possibly) they think that they are acting in the service of some divine cause and outwardly subscribe to a theological ideology from which they draw justification.

              But even then they’re probably motivated by some mix of a sense of injustice against the groups they identify with, general marginalisation, sense of meaninglessness, feeling like outsiders (and therefore wanting to assert their reality against the dominant one), etc., etc..

              Neither those in Iraq and Syria nor those elsewhere in the world are simply captured by ‘evil ideas’ as some (like Sam Harris) argue.

              Importantly, if ISIS wasn’t doing so well in recruiting the largely non-ideological fighters in Iraq and Syria (who have actually gained and held large swathes of land) they would have less ability to attract those outside those areas whose experience makes them more susceptible to theological justifications for outrageous acts.

  11. Rolf 11
    15 November 2015 at 1:52 pm

    Lest we forget. This was not an attack on Paris, neither an attack on France, it was outspokenly a revenge on the USA and the collusion of nations USA has built to attack others not willing to become members of the USA world “caliphate” of “democracies”. Also New Zealand is a member of that “caliphate” of “democracies”. The US spy center in the South Island is well known, Snowden disclosed there are two US spy offices in New Zealand, ANZUS, TPP, and other “security agreements” with the USA enabled the US to control New Zealand, so – when can we expect a similar attack in New Zealand. The rhetoric of “friendship with other nations is just empty words.

  12. Chooky 12
    15 November 2015 at 1:54 pm

    ‘No terrorist group can survive unless some govt finances it – terror economy expert’

    https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/214403-terrorism-business-money-jihad/

    In many ways terrorism works just like a business, and a costly one – the organization needs arms, supplies, and each recruit needs to be fed and equipped; it all costs money. But where do terrorists get their money? How are the atrocities financed? Is jihad even possible when you have no-one to back it with a hefty sum? And can a terror group become independent? We ask these questions to economist and expert of the terrorist financial world, Loretta Napoleoni, on Sophie&Co today.”

  13. Gangnam Style 13
    15 November 2015 at 2:20 pm

    And here in the real world (as opposed to the blinkered one eyed world of the right wing trolls above) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/26/muslims-rally-against-extremism_n_5889962.html

  14. Dialey 14
    15 November 2015 at 2:22 pm

    “Le mal qui est dans le monde vient presque toujours de l’ignorance, et la bonne volonté peut faire autant de dégâts que la méchanceté si elle n’est pas éclairée.” (Albert Camus, La Peste)
    The evil that is in the world comes almost always from ignorance, and good will can do as much as the excesses of wickedness if it is not enlightened.

    Knee jerk reactions and words spoken in the heat of anger, fear and horror will only feed the fire and release a maelstrom.

  15. Colonial Viper 15
    15 November 2015 at 2:57 pm

    An Act of War.

    Which enables France to activate Clause 5 of the NATO agreement to involve the entire military alliance.

  16. weka 16
    15 November 2015 at 3:06 pm

    karunaezara,

    I woke this morning deeply disturbed by the news from #Paris, but more amazed by the attention it received on social media. I understand Paris is a beloved and familiar space for a lot of people, but it troubled me that #Beirut, a city my father grew up in, had received so little attention after the horrific bombings two days earlier. It also troubled me that #Baghdad, a place I have absolutely no connection with, received even less attention after the senseless bombing that took place there last week. Worst of all, I found the understanding of the refugee crisis skewed and simplistic. If you’ve been following the journeys of the people leaving their homes around the world right now, perhaps you’ll understand why the words #SyrianRefugeeCrisis are just as devastating as #PrayForParis. It’s time to pray for humanity. It is time to make all places beloved. It’s time to pray for the world.

    The instagram is a worth a read too,

    https://instagram.com/p/-DmUOwJ0tC/

    • Macro 16.1
      15 November 2015 at 3:20 pm

      That is so very pertinent weka – thanks for this.

      • Grindlebottom 16.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 5:48 pm

        It’s very sobering and very poignant. The problem is sectarian attacks and suicide bombings have become so commonplace in Middle East countries they don’t attract much Western media & public attention unless there’s something really novel or outstanding about them.

        The massive amount of media attention given to the Boko Haram kidnapping of the Chibok schoolgirls, and their later attack & killing of Christians at Maiduguri University are examples.

    • Poission 16.2
      15 November 2015 at 6:02 pm

      Hassan Nasrallah (leader of Hezbollah) condemns the depravity of both bombings

      “People of the region of Arab and Islamic countries who are living under the brutality of ISIS, including Lebanon which suffered a few days ago from it, are the most aware and sympathetic of what hit the French nation last night,” Nasrallah said in a televised address.

      “We offer our deep condolences, solidarity, sympathy, moral and humanitarian stand to those innocents who are invaded by the barbaric criminal management of ISIS,” Nasrallah said.

      http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151115/1030125100/nasrallah-denounce-paris-attacks.html

  17. sabine 17
    15 November 2015 at 5:25 pm

    War
    and again, humanity has learned nothing.

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/665341523731603457

    http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/33505-why-of-course-the-people-don-t-want-war-why-should
    disclaimer: I am german by birth, so to me the last quote is simply my countries history.

  18. sabine 18
    15 November 2015 at 5:30 pm

    Sorry, I don’t know why it all shows instead of just showing the links. No idea? I am a luddite when it comes to these things. Help! Please!

  19. Burton B 19
    15 November 2015 at 6:25 pm

    Russia is fighting ISIS. President Putin wants a coalition with the west to fight them. But the yanks dont want that. The yanks and the frogs want Syria divided and weak. Like Libya.
    Israel wants the Golan Heights. Lotsa gas/oil there.
    Turkey is buying ISIS oil. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding ISIS with cash and weapons.
    USA has been bombing ISIS for more than a year without much success. USA is not very good at war it seems. Russia is making some progress against them.
    The Turks hate the kurds.
    The Kurds are fighting ISIS.
    Turkey wants Syrian land.
    Stop funding ISIS for starters.
    Support Russia and Syria and Iran and the Kurds against ISIS.
    It doesnt matter if you are left or right.
    We must unite against the Romans!

  20. ngatimozart 20
    15 November 2015 at 7:06 pm

    You can argue all you like about the rights and wrongs of historical western actions in the Middle East, but that doesn’t mitigate or remedy the evil that is Daesh. Daesh doesn’t care about your politics or what you think – all they want is your submission to their rule and beliefs. If you don’t you are a heretic and they will torture and kill you eventually. They don’t care about your rights because as far as they are concerned you are an infidel who doesn’t have any. They are just as evil as Hitler or Stalin.

    The real point is what to do about them now. They have two types of warfare that they utilise: “conventional” where they are attacking, conquering and holding territory; and unconventional where they are utilising guerrilla and terrorist tactics and strategies. Tane first type of warfare is relatively easy to combat because they have fixed targets and infrastructure to be targeted. However the unconventional side is far more difficult to counter especially when they utilises traditional guerrilla cell structures and practice operational security. The better the operational security the harder they are to detect and counter.

    Daesh is well funded and supported even more so than Al Quaeda. A goodly amount of Daesh funding and logistical support is emanating out of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. It his believed that Saudi and Qatari forces have supplied some training to Daesh. Daesh is Sunni, in fact more Wahabbi than orthodox Sunni. There is a historical sectarian rivalry between Sunnis and Shia which is reflected in the current geopolitical rivalry between Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies and Iran. This is why Daesh kill a lot of Shia.

    Daesh is like a Hydra and if you chop off one head another appears. Tane only way to

  21. Jenny Kirk 21
    15 November 2015 at 7:29 pm

    The French president says they now consider they are at war with ISIS. And our PM has said if France is at war, then we (NZ) are at war. Is that a declaration of war ?
    (TV3 News tonight)

    • Anne 21.1
      15 November 2015 at 7:47 pm

      Oh dear, so Key is copying Savage now:

      Where France goes we go…

      We’d better start building the bomb shelters now before the terrorists arrive.

    • Grindlebottom 21.2
      15 November 2015 at 7:54 pm

      As far as ISIS is concerned, if we’re training people to fight them we’re their enemies so we were probably already at war with them. Key’s just “me too”ing again.

      • Jenny Kirk 21.2.1
        15 November 2015 at 9:19 pm

        Yeah – but that “me too” stuff is scarey. It’s said without thought – just parroting what the masters tell ShonKey to say. And it doesn’t give us NZers any chance to be neutral on this matter. Or into “peace keeping” as has been our role in the past.

    • Mike the Savage One 21.3
      15 November 2015 at 10:58 pm

      Here is what John Key was quoted as saying, and what he actually said:

      http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/key-on-paris-attacks-these-people-know-no-boundaries-2015111515#axzz3rXpRltd4

      Having sent trainers to Iraq, and their protectors, to train Iraqi soldiers and special forces to fight ISIS was already a de-facto declaration of war, I think.

      So nothing has changed, the PM has only confirmed more clearly what NZ is doing under his government. One more terror attack in Paris is just the reason to reassure the French that their efforts are not done by them only.

      That put aside, the west has no real successful strategy, and again acts as a range of hypocritical governments of nations with worrying historic heritage, which ISIS cleverly exploit by referring to historic events that led to the cutting up of the Arab countries by the Brits and French after they defeated the Ottoman Empire during WW1.

      The US, French and British cannot joint the Russians for a proper peace deal, as that means letting the FSA be regarded as “terrorists” alongside Al Nusra and ISIS. Also supporting Assad is no solution, as he is one major reason for the civil war. The western military strategy is a mess in Syria, as they rely on groups that are weak and in disarray, and as air bombardments will not achieve all that is needed.

      The Russians are playing their games and follow a separate agenda, which is not compatible with the western nations’ one. Then you have the Iran and Saudi tensions, both supporting various parties in the war there.

      I see no change at all in what is discussed and proposed. Just more wannabe diplomatic talk with little prospect for success.

  22. Robert Atack 22
    15 November 2015 at 7:50 pm

    During Bill Clinton’s presidency 171 children died each day in Iraq due to the sanctions.

    All that effort to kill 130 people? If they had put it into say taking out a nuclear power plant they could have killed millions.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating killing anyone, just if someone is going to kill themselves I would think they would want to go for maximum impact ?

    • Grindlebottom 22.1
      15 November 2015 at 7:58 pm

      You’re disappointed? Kind of an odd post to make Robert. They should’ve killed more people because otherwise they’re not very good at it? I could be wrong and they’re obviously going to be reviewing their national security system, but I’d think the security around nuclear power plants would be a step up from the norm elsewhere.

      • Robert Atack 22.1.1
        15 November 2015 at 8:55 pm

        I’m just asking a question?
        Same on 9/11 with all the effort to take out a few buildings, when power plants make bigger targets?
        Not that I think a ‘rag head’ in a cave planed the hijack of the planes etc .
        Even a failed attack on a power plant would have massive reputations.
        Everyone wants to kill people, but attacking infrastructure is survivable, and destructive, doesn’t have to be a nuclear power plant, just a few substations?
        Look at what happened in Auckland, with a few fires in the wrong place.
        I mean they could have taken out a power plant, but instead they attacked a rock concert ?
        I guess burning down the Eiffel tower is so 2000 ish
        Wheels with in wheels ?
        Sorry to dwell on this but France has 58 nuclear power plants, and maybe 20 spent fuel cooling ponds??, all are reliant on off site electricity, or diesel motors to keep the cooling water flowing.

        • Grindlebottom 22.1.1.1
          15 November 2015 at 9:18 pm

          Ring 0800 ISIS and arrange a meeting in Raqqa. Tell them you’ve a few ideas they might find helpful. Don’t tell anyone else you’re going.

        • Reddelusion 22.1.1.2
          15 November 2015 at 10:39 pm

          Oh oh it’s the twilight zone

          • gnomic 22.1.1.2.1
            16 November 2015 at 2:04 am

            Can you sing or dance? You are useless at commenting here. And still a sad clown. Can’t you sod off to failoil or wherever they might appreciate your lack of talent! Forever would be good.

    • Paul 22.2
      15 November 2015 at 8:19 pm

      Further weirdness

  23. Mike the Savage One 23
    15 November 2015 at 9:49 pm

    The truth about the matter is, ISIS is as a yet more extreme expression of islamist, jihadist, yes perverted radicalisation, far outdoing the Al Qaeda affiliated cells and groups, attacking a perceived weak “civilised west”. The are encountering a rather liberal, so far peaceful, but weak, fragile society and state, that is very divided. ISIS strategists and propagandists know this and ruthlessly exploit the situation in France, and hence they have shockingly succeeded in what they planned to do, to create fear and insecurity.

    France has as a nation tried to play it both ways, be a superpower with strategic interests in Africa and the Middle East, supporting dictators here and there, who were happy to work in best corrupt fashion with their corporations, to make the deals for supplying cheap resources the country needs. At the same time French governments have tried to appease their workers by offering a network of social services and basic working conditions, so that they do largely belong to a middle class that is primarily white and intermingled now with some cosmopolitan do well migrants from all over the world.

    But they also tried to please their industrial and other employers, by delivering them cheap workers from various countries in North Africa and so, when there was a need for such during the expansion phases in the 1960s to 1980s. Others came as refugees from former colonies. Most were and are Muslims.

    With technology and world economic realities changing, many manual labourers were no longer needed, so second and third generation “migrants” (actually French of migrant background), many of whom happen to be of the Muslim faith, have ended up without work, with being totally marginalised and also often discriminated. There has been a trend to a revival of that faith in said communities for many years now, hence the debate about wearing veils in public and other issues.

    In summary France is one of many very contradictory, hypocritical kinds of societies, on a largely economically and socially privileged continent. While some enjoy drinking wine, partying, doing fun things, possibly also free sex, others in the same country adhere to codes and faiths that frown the same. That is a very fertile ground for dissent and trouble, and it provides recruits also for such terror groups like ISIS. Hence thousands from France fight in Syria and Iraq and a few other places.

    Still being a rather open and modern, democratic, free society, the ones that decide to do things such as in Paris this last Friday night, have the ability to move rather freely and like fish in water. I think the French government and middle class are very scared now, and future elections may well deliver Marie Le Pen as the next President. I fear we will have a return to fascism, there and to some degree in many places in the world, matched in other places by the quasi fascist radicalised islamist regimes such as the Califate in Syria and Iraq and potentially some other places. Perhaps Yemen is next, perhaps Libya, perhaps Egypt, Lebanon, even Saudi Arabia one day?

    So we get distracted by all this madness while we need to focus on climate change, on solving future resource challenges and creating a fairer society. Some politicians will love this distraction, as it deflects from issues they rather not deal with. All in all just an evolving greater disaster in the making.

    • Grindlebottom 23.1
      16 November 2015 at 10:08 am

      Thanks for that. Well worth the read. I think you’ve summarised the situation really well. The problem is what to do about it. Apart from climate change all the rest is typical of human history. And even climate change is really just an extension of the larger civilisations’ proclivity for mucking up their local environment.

  24. vto 24
    16 November 2015 at 7:17 am

    The French have only just realised they are “at war”?

    Like the Australians, British, Americans, Canadians and others, they have been bombing the middle east since forever, what the fuck do they expect?

    Go to war

    Get killed

    France went to war a long time ago

    They get killed

    next