Paris attacks (4 Viewers)

[Seven]

You may very well have a point that the emotion of the situation led me to present my argument in a less than balanced way, but please don't ever mistake anything I say as coming from a position of geostrategic ignorance.

If by less than balanced you mean without any nuance whatsoever, I guess we could agree. I don't know if you know something about this stuff or not. Perhaps you do. But surely you can understand that the emotion in your posts are not helpful? And while I get that you knew some of the victims personally, they were not your brother, best friend or wife. Many others have lost people that close to them in armed conflicts and we expect them to contribute to a rational solution too. So I think you owe it to them to try and stay calm yourself.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[IrishZebra]

If by less than balanced you mean without any nuance whatsoever, I guess we could agree. I don't know if you know something about this stuff or not. Perhaps you do. But surely you can understand that the emotion in your posts are not helpful? And while I get that you knew some of the victims personally, they were not your brother, best friend or wife. Many others have lost people that close to them in armed conflicts and we expect them to contribute to a rational solution too. So I think you owe it to them to try and stay calm yourself.

Perhaps I do need to inject more nuance and calmness into my posts,thank you. Let me however, say this with a calm head so that you don't mistake it for emotioned reasoning. The supporters (material) and members of ISIS should be wiped off the face of the earth. They are a military threat as well as an ideological one. Read the bullet points for yourself and decide if, in your opinion I have an handle on the situation, that's essentially the only standard you can judge my understanding by.

A military solution is a rational solution when you see the bigger picture of inter-empire competition in MENA. It's basically their boxer rebellion.

Perhaps you might also not call me an imbecile and recognise that what I did not say was, kill muslims, or ISIS= Muslim or that anybody who disagrees with exploitation of MENA is an enemy. What I said was anybody that fights ISIS is an ally and anybody who supports them can get fucked. If you believe that there is a nuance there where you can sort of support ISIS but not be in favour of the Paris attacks, you are in a zone that is incongruous with reality.

 

[Seven]

Perhaps I do need to inject more nuance and calmness into my posts,thank you. Let me however, say this with a calm head so that you don't mistake it for emotioned reasoning. The supporters (material) and members of ISIS should be wiped off the face of the earth. They are a military threat as well as an ideological one. Read the bullet points for yourself and decide if, in your opinion I have an handle on the situation, that's essentially the only standard you can judge my understanding by.

Perhaps you might also not call me an imbecile and recognise that what I did not say was, kill muslims, or ISIS= Muslim or that anybody who disagrees with exploitation of MENA is an enemy. What I said was anybody that fights ISIS is an ally and anybody who supports them can get fucked. If you believe that there is a nuance there where you can sort of support ISIS but not be in favour of the Paris attacks, you are in a zone that is incongruous with reality.

We are in complete agreement that ISIS needs to cease to exist. And soon.

But the way you phrased your posts was a bit more than that. If this is all you mean, I agree. And I think almost everyone does.

 

[IrishZebra]

I'd like to clarify further if anybody thinks my call to bleed them like pigs was hyperbolic, it wasn't.

 

[Buck Fuddy]

Perhaps I do need to inject more nuance and calmness into my posts,thank you. Let me however, say this with a calm head so that you don't mistake it for emotioned reasoning. The supporters (material) and members of ISIS should be wiped off the face of the earth. They are a military threat as well as an ideological one. Read the bullet points for yourself and decide if, in your opinion I have an handle on the situation, that's essentially the only standard you can judge my understanding by.

A military solution is a rational solution when you see the bigger picture of inter-empire competition in MENA. It's basically their boxer rebellion.

Perhaps you might also not call me an imbecile and recognise that what I did not say was, kill muslims, or ISIS= Muslim or that anybody who disagrees with exploitation of MENA is an enemy. What I said was anybody that fights ISIS is an ally and anybody who supports them can get fucked. If you believe that there is a nuance there where you can sort of support ISIS but not be in favour of the Paris attacks, you are in a zone that is incongruous with reality.

Also, I nominate this thread for "most politically correct" thread on the forum.

 

[Seven]

The most frustrating part of it all is that these guys amount to nothing. They have very little skill, they have almost no hightech weaponry and they are spineless. But you can't wage war on terror. If ISIS was a country and it really came down to it, you'd just nuke it. Which is also why I don't really get why ISIS is trying to gain an actual territory. IMO it would only harm them.

 

[IrishZebra]

They have sufficient capacity to be a shitty third world army already, with seized American materiel. There is a ground war aspect we have to contemplate seriously.

 

[Seven]

They have sufficient capacity to be a shitty third world army already, with seized American materiel. There is a ground war aspect we have to contemplate seriously.

Yes, but if it came down to an actual war, it would mean nothing. With an actual war I mean something on the scope of a world war. ISIS likes to act as if they'd be up for this, but the reality is it would be over in seconds. Imagine you could concentrate ISIS in Syria. And you'd know that all of Syria was ISIS. It would not be very difficult to win.

 

[j0ker]

Which is also why I don't really get why ISIS is trying to gain an actual territory. IMO it would only harm them.

Because they are going by the book, they want to create a caliphate.

 

[Cheesio]

You OK btw

Yeah bro, everything's fine for the time being.

- - - Updated - - -

Heck even a Western Muslims like Cheesio have defended attacking Freedom of Speech now living in and with the Freedom of Speech he hates.

But obviously if the West haven't done what we have in the Middle East. Muslims all around the World would salute Freedom of Speech.

What am I trying to say. It ain't that simple. So many things cause the extremism we see among Muslims.

What the fuck man ??

 

[Seven]

What the fuck man ??

Topmuzzie cartoons.

 

[Cheesio]

Muhammad cartoons.

got that, so the fact that i doesn't agree with the way France handles " freedom of speech " doesn't mean i can't live here or i don't like France as a country. It's Just like saying no French people should live in Morocco because it's not the same ideology. As long as am a good citizen and i respect the rules of the states, doesn't see the difference between me muslim or not with my ideas or any other person living here, furthermore i am sure many native french people disagree with the way their country see freedom of speech. In fact a lot of the people i talked too, told me that one of the main problems in their opinion with France is that they took Secularism too far and it's a no longer a gouverning method, it becomes a religion wich contributes to a lot of the marginalization we see to people who are religious.

One thing is comforting is that the reaction this time is different and the fact that these attacks happened days after the ones in Lebanon, Egypt... helped people see that Isis is not Islam against the west like Some people here try to give them the idea but it's a terrorist group who has no religion and it should be dealt with without mixing Islam with Islamic terrorist group.

 

[Seven]

got that, so the fact that i doesn't agree with the way France handles " freedom of speech " doesn't mean i can't live here or i don't like France as a country.

There are levels of disagreement obviously. But freedom of speech is quickly becoming one of the most central values in Europe.

 

[Azzurri7]

Everybody who fights Islamic terror is an ally. Everybody who condones attacks against us or our allies can die. The people of Lebanon are the legitist motherfuckers in the Levant, everybody knows this.

Can you explain?

The most frustrating part of it all is that these guys amount to nothing. They have very little skill, they have almost no hightech weaponry and they are spineless. But you can't wage war on terror. If ISIS was a country and it really came down to it, you'd just nuke it. Which is also why I don't really get why ISIS is trying to gain an actual territory. IMO it would only harm them.

Lets be honest, with or without a territory it wouldn't be that hard to eliminate them.

A group of untrained individuals, not speaking the same language, not sharing the same culture wouldn't take long to finish them.

 

[Seven]

Lets be honest, with or without a territory it wouldn't be that hard to eliminate them.

A group of untrained individuals, not speaking the same language, not sharing the same culture wouldn't take long to finish them.

IMO it would. Because they are spread throughout society and you couldn't eliminate them without harming others.

 

[Cheesio]

There are levels of disagreement obviously. But freedom of speech is quickly becoming one of the most central values in Europe.

It is and the fact that i chose to live here means i obliged to comply with these values even if i don't agree with some of them. And please freedom of speech is a subjective matter, freedom of speech in the US is not the same as the one in France or in Danemark if you know what i mean.

 

[Seven]

It is and the fact that i chose to live here means i obliged to comply with these values even if i don't agree with some of them. And please freedom of speech is a subjective matter, freedom of speech in the US is not the same as the one in France or in Danemark if you know what i mean.

Muhammad cartoons fall under the scope of freedom of speech in all those countries though.

 

[Azzurri7]

IMO it would. Because they are spread throughout society and you couldn't eliminate them without harming others.

From my experience, someone who has lived in the zone, trust me it wouldn't be hard, take down the big heads who are in-charge they would all disappear like cockroaches. It would have been harder had they shared the same ideology or dogma like Hezbolla for instance but they don't, they don't even share the same language let alone accent.

This terrorist organization is the richest/wealthiest organization in the modern history, a settlement to kill the big heads would surely weaken them, they will be hiding like rats everywhere but there would be no one to guide them of course until a new terrorist organization will pop up.

 

[IrishZebra]

Can you explain?

.

legit
1. (adj.) A modern synonym for words such as "cool," "ill," "tight," or "dope." Used to describe a noun that is of a particularly excellent quality. The slang use of this term is slowly but steadily increasing in popularity.

2. (adj.) Authentic. see legitimate.

 

[Azzurri7]

legit
1. (adj.) A modern synonym for words such as "cool," "ill," "tight," or "dope." Used to describe a noun that is of a particularly excellent quality. The slang use of this term is slowly but steadily increasing in popularity.

2. (adj.) Authentic. see legitimate.

Thanks but I was referring to the timing, I didn't really get why you came up with this line and if you were being sarcastic or not.