Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

BeerBottle
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 5:26 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby BeerBottle » Mon Nov 16, 2015 11:27 am UTC

leady wrote:Can we please avoid the ludicrous false equivocations between Christianity vs Islam with regards to terrorism
Thanks Leady for this raising this point. Of course in discussion like this it can help to keep perspective. Next to the centuries of aggressive wars, invasions, colonisation, forced transportation, genocide, slavery, etc with global reach perpitrated by christian countries, the current wave of islamic terrorism, awful as it appears to us now, is rather limited in scope.
CorruptUser wrote:Basically that that whenever there's a major terrorist attack, the terrorists seem to go out of their way to target Jews. Not much of a point, really, just joking that all was right with the world since I was initially surprised they didn't blow up a Jewish temple or something. The terrorists seem to be making the statement "we'll keep bombing France/US until France/US stops interfering the mid-East, but even if France/US stops we'll still go after the Jews anyway".
I still think you are over-generalising but I don't think it worth arguing the point further. Actually, the second part of what you said, on the motivation of ISIS, is most interesting to me. Usually any motivation for these attacks is described by western governments/media purely in religious terms (as has been done in this thread). But actually ISIS claim to have rather more down to earth demands - things like "stop meddling in muslim countries".

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 11:48 am UTC

Ah yes, the immediate equivocation of imperialism from between 75 - 200 years ago with the current global and ongoing religious based terrorism & outright total war

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 12:14 pm UTC

23 Arrested in raids against militants in France.

So, umm, how did the French find so many so quickly? How did they know whom to target?

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby PolakoVoador » Mon Nov 16, 2015 12:43 pm UTC

Maybe french intelligence was already keeping an eye on some of them, but didn't have enough to arrest them? And now they got confirmation? I don't know, I also find it kinda weird to arrest so many so quickly, but that's a possibility.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 12:45 pm UTC

The French legal system is far more tolerant of "dragnets" than the English speaking world - they are very "pragmatic" when it comes to things like this

aoeu
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby aoeu » Mon Nov 16, 2015 1:28 pm UTC

leady wrote:Ah yes, the immediate equivocation of imperialism from between 75 - 200 years ago with the current global and ongoing religious based terrorism & outright total war

And who started the war?

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 1:47 pm UTC

The Sunnis in Syria rising up against Assad, with a level of naïve support from the west?

Don't get me wrong, I understand that you want to paint this as a "chickens roosting" thing, and I agree we may have built a couple of bird boxes. But when you have native born citizens involved due to foreign policy actions in completely different countries even without the ethnic roots - then there is a problem that needs consideration.

User avatar
Koa
Posts: 538
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:20 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Koa » Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:12 pm UTC

Fractal_Tangent wrote:This is the kind of thing I meant that I was happy I wasn't seeing on my wall.

I got that, but I don't understand why. It's ignoring a perpetual problem that has the potential to be a lot more dangerous to the world than it has been thus far. If people are so willing to ignore or defend the ideology because it's attached to people who can approach it rationally and civilly, then Islam needs a major reform to disassociate itself from its uglier side. Then we could discuss the problems with old Islam without also targeting the good people of the faith. Maybe it's entirely idealistic and impractical, requiring some spiritual intervention, but is it really so unreasonable to suggest? Is the proper response to mourn the victims and wait until the next tragedy, never talking about the why because it's taboo to criticize a religion? France can retaliate but it's not going to do much. Even if all the radicals were magically killed off, others will take their place in time.

And like leady said, I don't understand the comparisons to Christianity at all. Christianity has its issues, much more so in the centuries past of course, but it's not a major threat to the world today like Islam has continually proven itself to be.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:22 pm UTC

aoeu wrote:
leady wrote:Ah yes, the immediate equivocation of imperialism from between 75 - 200 years ago with the current global and ongoing religious based terrorism & outright total war

And who started the war?


It was Mrs Peacock the Sunnis, in the study 7th century, with the handgun line of succession.

*sings* we didn't start the fire...

But anyway, the recent history is quite weird. During imperialism, both Communism and (ethnic) Fascism became quite popular in the Arab world. They were combined in an incredibly lazy fashion to create Baathism, which is the idea that all Arabs should work together to create an Islamic socialist paradise for Arabs only. So, CommuNazIslam. Somehow. Syria, which is mostly Sunni, ended up with a Shiite Baathist dictator. Iraq, which is mostly Shia, ended up with a Sunni Baathist dictator. Which is why in spite of both being Baathists they hated each other.
Last edited by CorruptUser on Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:32 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby JudeMorrigan » Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:31 pm UTC

Koa wrote:And like leady said, I don't understand the comparisons to Christianity at all. Christianity has its issues, much more so in the centuries past of course, but it's not a major threat to the world today like Islam has continually proven itself to be.

The fact that Christians (mostly) have fewer issues than they used to is rather the point. Targeting the extremist elements that aren't even particularly friendly towards mainstream Islam seems rather more likely to be productive than declaring the entirely religion with its 1.7 billion adherents to be anathema.

Chen
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Chen » Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:32 pm UTC

Koa wrote:I got that, but I don't understand why. It's ignoring a perpetual problem that has the potential to be a lot more dangerous to the world than it has been thus far. If people are so willing to ignore or defend the ideology because it's attached to people who can approach it rationally and civilly, then Islam needs a major reform to disassociate itself from its uglier side. Then we could discuss the problems with old Islam without also targeting the good people of the faith. Maybe it's entirely idealistic and impractical, requiring some spiritual intervention, but is it really so unreasonable to suggest? Is the proper response to mourn the victims and wait until the next tragedy, never talking about the why because it's taboo to criticize a religion? France can retaliate but it's not going to do much. Even if all the radicals were magically killed off, others will take their place in time.

And like leady said, I don't understand the comparisons to Christianity at all. Christianity has its issues, much more so in the centuries past of course, but it's not a major threat to the world today like Islam has continually proven itself to be.


Or you could just not base judgement of the people based on their religion, but rather based on their actions. You know, condemn the violent Jihadis rather than all Muslims. Same way I can blame people like the Westboro Baptist Church for their bad actions, rather than just blaming all Baptists (or all Christians if you want to go even higher level).

The Quran has as many ridiculous rules in it as the Bible (notably Old testament) does. I don't see how it's reasonable to call on the religion to somehow reform itself, when it's a relative few that are the ones espousing ridiculous parts of the ideology.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:54 pm UTC

Aesops fables. A trumpeter is being executed for a war. "But I'm just a musician, not a soldier!" he cries out, to which his executors reply "you blew the horns of war, you are just as responsible".

If anything, Aesop got it wrong; the trumpeter is WORSE than the soldier. The spear can only stab one at a time, but the trumpet can inspire hundreds.

Go after a different clarion*.

That is, focus more on the people encouraging terrorism rather than the terrorists themselves.

*the clarion is a French assault rifle. It's also an olden tymes trumpet.

User avatar
Fractal_Tangent
Today is my Birthday!
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:34 pm UTC
Location: Here, I suppose. I could be elsewhere...

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Fractal_Tangent » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:03 pm UTC

Koa wrote:
Fractal_Tangent wrote:This is the kind of thing I meant that I was happy I wasn't seeing on my wall.

I got that, but I don't understand why. It's ignoring a perpetual problem that has the potential to be a lot more dangerous to the world than it has been thus far. If people are so willing to ignore or defend the ideology because it's attached to people who can approach it rationally and civilly, then Islam needs a major reform to disassociate itself from its uglier side. Then we could discuss the problems with old Islam without also targeting the good people of the faith. Maybe it's entirely idealistic and impractical, requiring some spiritual intervention, but is it really so unreasonable to suggest? Is the proper response to mourn the victims and wait until the next tragedy, never talking about the why because it's taboo to criticize a religion? France can retaliate but it's not going to do much. Even if all the radicals were magically killed off, others will take their place in time.

And like leady said, I don't understand the comparisons to Christianity at all. Christianity has its issues, much more so in the centuries past of course, but it's not a major threat to the world today like Islam has continually proven itself to be.

It's generally the conflation between ISIS and people living their lives wanting to be left alone that bothers me. There are 1.5ish billion Muslims in the world. If they all wanted us dead, we'd probably be dead. It's frustrating that all so many Muslims have to go around being like 'We don't endorse this' when we take that for granted when Christians bomb abortion clinics because the Christians that bomb abortion clinics are apparently not terrorists. We don't go around asking for an apology from local pastors. White people shooting up churches frequented by mainly black people are understood to be dangerous racists that don't stand for what the average white person does. Everyone knows that there are idiots in every group but the continuing conflation of Muslims and ISIS is actually harming a lot of Muslims because there are retaliatory attacks aimed at mosques.

I am of the opinion that without religion things would be no better or worse off. People generally find ways and reasons to be dickbags against each other and religion happens to be one of those reasons.
eSOANEM wrote:
right now, that means it's Nazi punching time.


she/her/hers
=]

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:11 pm UTC

Is it wrong to conflate abortion bombers with the people standing outside picketing the clinics?

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby JudeMorrigan » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:22 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Is it wrong to conflate abortion bombers with the people standing outside picketing the clinics?

Yes, it is. Also, I'm personally starting to lose the thread of this analogy. Who are you comparing the picketers to? (Serious, snark-free question)

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:33 pm UTC

I imagine the picketers in the analogy are the between 20 - 40% of western adherents that support a broad set of key tenets, from terrorist action through to murder of apostates based on surveys (which sound worse than they are because they aren't baselined against equivalent questions to other groups, but still...)

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3995
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Dauric » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:35 pm UTC

So, wild thoughts:

ISIS is trying to establish a state, a caliphate. And this attack in Paris has been called by some politicians (in France and elsewhere) an act of war.

What's the implications of 'the west' saying "Okay ,fine, you're a state. You're also at full-blown war with Europe, U.S., and Russia. Have fun!"

I'm not saying this is likely, or even desirable, the thought experiment intrigues me however.

Would it actually change the nature of the conflict on the ground? Would the U.S. fully commit to large-scale combat operations after being involved in combat operations and "support roles" in the region for a decade and a half (the answer to this is probably dependent on which party gets the White House)? How would the borders get drawn in a post-ISIS-conflict scenario? Would where the borders are drawn actually matter?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:41 pm UTC

No one will recognise the statehood of ISIS, because statehood confers legal rights. Basically no more targeted drone strikes (state on state assassinations aren't allowed for example even at war - daft I know), combatants become prisoners of war etc etc.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:46 pm UTC

This article in The Atlantic from last March argues that ISIS wants to provoke a more dramatically warlike response from their metaphorical "Rome", i.e. the West, because that fits in with the apocalyptic prophecies that they claim legitimize what they're doing.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:50 pm UTC

JudeMorrigan wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Is it wrong to conflate abortion bombers with the people standing outside picketing the clinics?

Yes, it is. Also, I'm personally starting to lose the thread of this analogy. Who are you comparing the picketers to? (Serious, snark-free question)


I'm comparing the people that murder abortion doctors to the people that stand outside the clinics screaming "abortion is murder".

The picketers aren't doing the murdering, but they are giving the murderers "moral support". With the claim "abortion = murder", if you truly believe that then it's only a few steps to say "abortion is murder, abortion doctors commit murder, stopping abortions at any cost is a net good, murdering abortion doctors is a good thing". They are in essence telling the abortion clinic bombers that the "cause" is just. I don't think the picketers are entirely innocent in the bombing of clinics.
Last edited by CorruptUser on Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:00 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby JudeMorrigan » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:53 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
JudeMorrigan wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Is it wrong to conflate abortion bombers with the people standing outside picketing the clinics?

Yes, it is. Also, I'm personally starting to lose the thread of this analogy. Who are you comparing the picketers to? (Serious, snark-free question)


The people that murder abortion doctors.

The picketers aren't doing the murdering, but they are giving the murderers "moral support". They are in essence telling the abortion clinic bombers that the "cause" is just. I don't think the picketers are entirely innocent in the bombing of clinics.

Yes, yes. I understand who the picketers *are*. I was asking who you were analogizing them to.

(And to be clear, I'm no particular fan of the practice of picketing abortion clinics. I'm also ok with the idea that they're not *entirely* innocent wrt the bombings. I don't, however, agree that it's fair to *conflate* them with the bombers themselves. And I can't think of a cure for their behavior that wouldn't be potentially worse than the sickness.)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:08 pm UTC

Someone was saying "well, we don't conflate abortion bombers with all Christians", and I'm saying "but I do conflate them with the picketers".

Replace "abortion clinic bombers" with "terrorists" and "picketers" with "people marching down the streets demanding Sharia and everything else the terrorists want". Abortion clinic bombers bomb clinics because people convince them that a world without abortion is so just that murdering doctors is an acceptable price. Terrorists bomb people because people convince them that a Caliphate is so just that murdering civilians is an acceptable price.

It's wrong to conflate all Muslims with terrorists, just like it's wrong to conflate all Christians with abortion clinic bombers, but I don't see a problem conflating terrorists with the people marching in the street supporting their goals.

"How to deal with it" is obviously a sensitive issue, because whenever free speech is involved removing rights can end up creating a more horrific society than the terrorists could ever hope to achieve...

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:02 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The Bataclan theatre was owned by Jews and was for years under constant death threats because they held pro-Israel events. So the terrorists didn't forget to target Jews this time around. Hooray, all is right with the world! Wait, no, not at all.

But anyway, for reasons I'm not sure of, the Paris attacks seem to be more horrific than the recent plane bombing in Egypt. I can't figure out why, when more people were killed in the bombing. Is it the "personal" nature of the gunmen actually shooting people that they see as opposed to simply planting a bomb and never having to see exactly who they murder? I don't know.


Personal murders do seem worse, somehow. Logical, perhaps not, but it really does seem particularly horrible. There's the "impending death" aspect as well. If you're in a situation where death is coming, and you can't do anything about it, that's pretty awful. The mix of the two makes such an event particularly horrific, I think.

Shivahn wrote:I'm skeptical that the Bataclan was targetted because Jews rather than simply because it was a large, soft target.


It is likely both. I would imagine that neither factor is likely to be coincidence. There is a trend of anti-jewish violence and rhetoric among that lot, so they probably regarded that as a point in it's favor for target selection.

dg61 wrote:I suspect also that it is easier to carry out a bombing/other attack on a nightclub or someplace like that then a plane, especially after 9/11(presumably you need either a missile, or a bomb powerful enough to destroy/render inoperable and non-aerodynamic the plane that isn't going to be easily found). And of course there's less of they "you could be basically doing your normal, everyday shit and get killed" with a plane bombing since on average people fly on planes less often than they do other day-to-day things.


It is a particularly hard form of target to stop. For airplanes, we can at least slap security at airports and hope really hard that the odds have gone down(despite my skepticism that this is really effective). For "large gathering of people", well...that happens basically constantly. The number of potential targets is high, and the opportunity for pre-emptive identification is relatively low. A few more folks walking into a crowd is really, really common, and how on earth do you realize in time that this lot is dangerous and stop them?

sardia wrote:If you're gonna blame radical elements that split off from the original teachings, why aren't you blaming Jesus for being a shitty prophet? A good prophet would have kept all his followers.


*shrug* I think it's entirely fair to blame Christianity for crazy things that Christians do, sure.

sardia wrote:All was right =/= they did something as I expected. You do realize that?


It was a clearly sarcastic comment.

leady wrote:Can we please avoid the ludicrous false equivocations between Christianity vs Islam with regards to terrorism


Certainly. Christianity has a particularly bloody past, but is now somewhat more sedate, at least as concerns overt murder.

It's like a more mature Islam. Islam's just going through it's bloody phase.

I wonder if it's a universal trait to religions. I wouldn't *think* so...Christianity and Islam are more closely related than many others, so it's hard to generalize to all from them, but it's certainly interesting.

Chen wrote:Or you could just not base judgement of the people based on their religion, but rather based on their actions. You know, condemn the violent Jihadis rather than all Muslims. Same way I can blame people like the Westboro Baptist Church for their bad actions, rather than just blaming all Baptists (or all Christians if you want to go even higher level).

The Quran has as many ridiculous rules in it as the Bible (notably Old testament) does. I don't see how it's reasonable to call on the religion to somehow reform itself, when it's a relative few that are the ones espousing ridiculous parts of the ideology.


Well, those of us who are not religious generally do give Christianity at large some credit for creating the environment in which Westboro, etc thrives. Yeah, signs with 'god hates fags' are extreme, even for Christianity, but one doesn't have to search too hard to find a pretty popular sentiment that's basically a slightly less overt statement of the same thing.

Islam, same same.

Dauric wrote:So, wild thoughts:

ISIS is trying to establish a state, a caliphate. And this attack in Paris has been called by some politicians (in France and elsewhere) an act of war.

What's the implications of 'the west' saying "Okay ,fine, you're a state. You're also at full-blown war with Europe, U.S., and Russia. Have fun!"

I'm not saying this is likely, or even desirable, the thought experiment intrigues me however.

Would it actually change the nature of the conflict on the ground? Would the U.S. fully commit to large-scale combat operations after being involved in combat operations and "support roles" in the region for a decade and a half (the answer to this is probably dependent on which party gets the White House)? How would the borders get drawn in a post-ISIS-conflict scenario? Would where the borders are drawn actually matter?


I'm picturing a mushroom cloud over an ISIS stronghold, and imagining the effect this would have on the world.

I'm not entirely sure that borders are the critical thing for fighting ISIS, but messages matter.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby leady » Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:22 pm UTC

The thing is about "extreme" Christianity is that it consists of 30 inbred chaps in Pennsylvania and three goats, even then its a hard hitting placard campaign.

The super religious Christians in the US may share some tenets on a continuum, but its largely going to be the last discussions of rights / privileges of a couple of groups and none of them seriously advocate a roll back to 1950 on these. The more casual Christian, of which the US is filled on both sides of the house, shares little more than a passing belief in Jesus

On the other hand the average level of devoutness in general western Islam is scarily like that of the super religious in the US and they are embedded in a highly secular / atheistic countries. They also carry a disturbing level of extra-national grievance, because of a shared religion. All in all its a very hard problem to resolve

Chen
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Chen » Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:40 pm UTC

leady wrote:On the other hand the average level of devoutness in general western Islam is scarily like that of the super religious in the US and they are embedded in a highly secular / atheistic countries.


Uh where is that first part of that coming from? You have any citations?

Newt
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 2:33 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Newt » Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:48 pm UTC

BeerBottle wrote:
leady wrote:Can we please avoid the ludicrous false equivocations between Christianity vs Islam with regards to terrorism
Thanks Leady for this raising this point. Of course in discussion like this it can help to keep perspective. Next to the centuries of aggressive wars, invasions, colonisation, forced transportation, genocide, slavery, etc with global reach perpitrated by christian countries, the current wave of islamic terrorism, awful as it appears to us now, is rather limited in scope.


That sure sounds a lot like the history of Islamic conquest, too.

Tyndmyr wrote:Certainly. Christianity has a particularly bloody past, but is now somewhat more sedate, at least as concerns overt murder.

It's like a more mature Islam. Islam's just going through it's bloody phase.


It's not like this is an entirely new development. Islam has a bloody past as well, dating back to Muhammed himself; although not especially violent by 7th century standards, people seem to forget that he was, by modern standards, a tribal warlord.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby sardia » Mon Nov 16, 2015 7:19 pm UTC

Tyndmyr,
I don't expect anything substantial since it would almost veritably involve ground troops. Maybe they'll send special forces on top of their air strikes. But yes, IS is pushing off a lot of powerful countries. More importantly, it's doing it while holding territory. You can either be a shadowy terrorist force, or a warlord force controlling territory. It's very hard to do both for long.
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2 ... verreached

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6888
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby ucim » Mon Nov 16, 2015 7:27 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm picturing a mushroom cloud over an ISIS stronghold, and imagining the effect this would have on the world.

More mushroom clouds; the message is "If you've got 'em, now's your chance to use 'em."

Now who has nukes, and a grudge?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Nov 16, 2015 7:36 pm UTC

If it's an act of war, can France call upon NATO to have EVERYONE invade Syria? Including the fucking useless Turks? Maybe make a side deal with Russia; you invade Syria with us, pretend we are all buddy buddy, make sure Assad goes, help set up a regime that doesn't oppress its citizens too much and pretends to have democracy, and we let you set up a puppet state does mostly what you want so long as it doesn't attack anything of ours.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby morriswalters » Mon Nov 16, 2015 7:49 pm UTC

NATO to this point hasn't shown any inclination to get involved. On the other hand we did invade Iraq and you can see how that worked out. But if you want to restart the draft and put a couple of hundred thousand troops in Syria for the foreseeable future, why not. It might solve something. That assuming that you want something vaguely like stability.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:14 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:I'm picturing a mushroom cloud over an ISIS stronghold, and imagining the effect this would have on the world.

More mushroom clouds; the message is "If you've got 'em, now's your chance to use 'em."

Now who has nukes, and a grudge?

Jose


Meh. I don't think the rest of the world would suddenly nuke france if france blows away a buncha terrorists in a non-nuclear state.

It *would* be a big deal, though. The most serious kind of message. And an interesting alternative to troops on the ground.

I am less than optimistic, though. There will more likely be a great deal of fence building and immigrant delays instead, all round. Everyone will offer "support" for France, where support is condolances, not action.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Vahir » Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:52 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
ucim wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:I'm picturing a mushroom cloud over an ISIS stronghold, and imagining the effect this would have on the world.

More mushroom clouds; the message is "If you've got 'em, now's your chance to use 'em."

Now who has nukes, and a grudge?

Jose


Meh. I don't think the rest of the world would suddenly nuke france if france blows away a buncha terrorists in a non-nuclear state.

It *would* be a big deal, though. The most serious kind of message. And an interesting alternative to troops on the ground.

I am less than optimistic, though. There will more likely be a great deal of fence building and immigrant delays instead, all round. Everyone will offer "support" for France, where support is condolances, not action.


Just to be clear, you aren't advocating the use of weapons of mass destruction here, right?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby sardia » Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:56 pm UTC

Our casual disregard for civilian casualties does not extend to mass murder on that scale. It's OK to kill civilians, but you have to spread it out over time so it doesn't look as bad. Killing less than 20 in a single hit is OK, killing tens of thousands over a large time scale is OK. We still recoil at killing tens of thousands in a single attack. Though I will say that nukes do make interesting anti guerilla warfare weapons.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6888
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby ucim » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:01 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Meh. I don't think the rest of the world would suddenly nuke france if france blows away a buncha terrorists in a non-nuclear state.
Neither do I. But France wouldn't be the target. Everyone with a grudge has a different target, for different reasons.

"Now's your chance!"

What's the list of countries with nukes? And non-countries that might have them?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby sardia » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:07 pm UTC

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... ar_weapons

It's very short. There's also the deal with radiation going over allied countries.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby morriswalters » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:12 pm UTC

Nukes. An idiots way to show that you have no sense at all.

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Sizik » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:13 pm UTC

Also, if Syria is nuked, where will the refugees go back to?
she/they
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6888
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby ucim » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:15 pm UTC

sardia wrote:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons

It's very short. There's also the deal with radiation going over allied countries.

wikipedia wrote: NPT-designated nuclear weapon states (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States)
Other states with nuclear weapons (India, Pakistan, North Korea)
Other states thought to have nuclear weapons (Israel)
NATO nuclear weapons sharing states (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey)
States formerly possessing nuclear weapons (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, South Africa)
There are no troubling countries on this list? Because OTSHTF, there won't be any more discussion.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:18 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:Just to be clear, you aren't advocating the use of weapons of mass destruction here, right?


I'm tossing around the importance of action in terms of sending a message, rather than fiddling with policies that, frankly, will mostly affect refugees.

But, as a mental exercise, a nuke doesn't HAVE to kill tons of innocent people. Small nukes, like hiroshima/nagasaki, had the death toll they did because they were targetted at cities. It's not terribly hard to imagine that a target might exist in a sufficiently remote area that colateral damage would be minimal. And, in practice, a certain level of collateral damage happens regardless.

And imagining the diplomatic fallout of that is a fun exercise. In point of fact, it's almost certainly ludicrous overkill, but as a message, it's interesting to contemplate.

Unlikely, of course. Even if action is to be taken, tradition will probably dictate sending in troops or something, even if the actual death tolls are significantly higher.

ucim wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Meh. I don't think the rest of the world would suddenly nuke france if france blows away a buncha terrorists in a non-nuclear state.
Neither do I. But France wouldn't be the target. Everyone with a grudge has a different target, for different reasons.

"Now's your chance!"

What's the list of countries with nukes? And non-countries that might have them?

Jose


Why? That's not really how MAD works.

MAD very convincingly stops nuclear powers from blowing each other away. It also stops any overt conventional conflict between nuclear powers. But it *definitely* does not prevent conventional conflict between a nuclear power and a non-nuclear power.

I suspect that so long as there is no risk of someone believing they are the target, it would also not prevent the use of nuclear weapons on non-nuclear powers. But, this may be getting far from the topic. I was not intending to make this primarily a topic about MAD, merely speculating a bit regarding responses.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1197
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Over 100 dead in shooting, bombing in Paris

Postby commodorejohn » Mon Nov 16, 2015 9:18 pm UTC

There are some countries of concern on that list, yes, but of the states listed, only North Korea is even close to crazy enough to escalate to nuclear war without one hell of a provocation, and while they do a lot of grandstanding, they've still got China as the 800-pound gorilla of a babysitter keeping them from stirring up too much shit.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 27 guests