Cersei Lannister

Nov 14 2015, 03:07 PM

The only answer is military intervention on the ground, the risk of more organised attacks is too high to ignore it, popular opinion be damned, the only way is to go on the offensive. There are always downsides, but if military intervention is done right and a country secured, refugee numbers should go down as people choose to return home, when it's safe. Airstrikes are useless, they don't work on their own, they need ground support.

Buuberries

Nov 14 2015, 03:29 PM

For some reason I don't really care about the attack. Sure it's sad people died and my condolences go out to the friends and family of those it affected, but so much more s*** happens in other countries and no one really bats an eye like this unless it's a western country. Now people on social media are having a huff about it. Bloody western media

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:08 PM

Congrats EU that is why you should let the migrants in even if they are not refugees.

GinyuTokusentai

Nov 14 2015, 05:12 PM

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:08 PM

Congrats EU that is why you should let the migrants in even if they are not refugees.

If they're refugees it means that this kind of thing is what they are fleeing from. They're not fleeing from tolerant democratic secular peaceful governments.

Sectum Sempra

Nov 14 2015, 08:42 AM

POOHEAD189

Nov 14 2015, 06:22 AM

It says there might be up to 153 dead. It's so weird something like this could happen in such a civilized city, but it can.

Quote:

 

It was proven actually, as many eye witness reports say they were screaming things about Syria and ISIS as it happened. Maybe watch the news.

You're pretty blind. 1) Reports aren't confirmations. And 2) Islam, Christianity, Judaism, all have main themes of peace. Radicals are not representations of the whole. In fact I'd argue 85% of normal Christians don't truly follow Christianity either. But either way, I can go to France and yell "FOR AMERICA" and shoot people. It doesn't mean America wants to destroy France.

You're apparently not very good at reading. I'm sorry about that. I'll repost my last post:

Seriously, when are we going to stop calling this festering cesspool of evil and malice disgrace of a religion "peaceful"? When is everyone going to stop being such a nancy and stop being so damned offended by EVERYTHING and stand up for yourself and your freedom of speech? I cannot stand this anymore. 2015 truly is the year everyone was offended by everything. The world is afraid to offend Islam and tell it like it truly is: a group of evil, evil people.

"But Sectum, if you talk to Western Muslims,..."

Yeah, Western Muslims aren't real Muslims, sorry. I am an Apologetic, I study religions. It's kind of my thing. Read the Quran. I have. It gives detailed descriptions on how to murder those Muslims who don't adhere to the strict values of the Quran and Shariah Law. It says to kill them. Yes, kill Muslims. It also says to kill anyone who doesn't believe, except Christians, who can be offered a taxation for as long as they live, or as long as they live without converting to Islam. Anyone else? Kill them. Yeah, it's really a religion of "peace". Blunt fact: Western Muslims who condemn people like ISIS for doing what they do, simply aren't real Muslims. They're what Mohammed would call an infidel as well.

"But Sectum, I read in the Quran not to kill anyone..."

Yeah, sorry, the Quran has a law that states that anything written after something previously written in the Quran supersedes it, therefore if Verse 14 says don't kill, and verse 18 says kill them all, verse 18 is law. And guess what? That's actually exactly what the Quran does. It gets progressively more violent in nature the further you delve into it. Too bad that law exist. So no, it is not a religion of "peace" at all.

Islam, as a religion, follows the code of their holy book, much like Christianity follows the Bible. IF A MUSLIM DOESN'T FOLLOW THE QURAN, THEY ARE NOT A TRUE MUSLIM, AND SHOULD BE KILLED AS STATED BY THE QURAN. Do you want me to bold, italicize, and strike through my text? Would you get it then?

Islam is not a peaceful religion. Peaceful Islamist are backsliders, those not following the faith. True Islam = violent. It's quite simple. Get your head out of your a*** and open your eyes.

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:16 PM

GinyuTokusentai

Nov 14 2015, 05:12 PM

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:08 PM

Congrats EU that is why you should let the migrants in even if they are not refugees.

If they're refugees it means that this kind of thing is what they are fleeing from. They're not fleeing from tolerant democratic secular peaceful governments.

They should not flee till Berlin, They simply shall stop at Athene. I mean Its not like they bombing every house in Greece

Lot of them are economical migrants, believe it or not

Quote:

 

Ascertaining motivation is complex, but most of the migrants are refugees, fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Eritrea: according to UNHCR data, as of November 2015, 85% of Mediterranean Sea arrivals come from the world's top ten refugee-producing countries (52% from Syria, 19% from Afghanistan, 6% from Iraq, 5% from Eritrea, 2% from Somalia and 1% from Sudan). The top ten nationalities of Mediterranean Sea arrivals also include Nigeria (2%), Pakistan (2%), Gambia (1%) and Mali (1%).

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:16 PM

GinyuTokusentai

Nov 14 2015, 05:12 PM

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:08 PM

Congrats EU that is why you should let the migrants in even if they are not refugees.

If they're refugees it means that this kind of thing is what they are fleeing from. They're not fleeing from tolerant democratic secular peaceful governments.

They should not flee till Berlin, They simply shall stop at Athene. I mean Its not like they bombing every house in Greece

Lot of them are economical migrants, believe it or not

Copy_Ninja

Nov 14 2015, 05:30 PM

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:16 PM

GinyuTokusentai

Nov 14 2015, 05:12 PM

Lord Protector

Nov 14 2015, 05:08 PM

Congrats EU that is why you should let the migrants in even if they are not refugees.

If they're refugees it means that this kind of thing is what they are fleeing from. They're not fleeing from tolerant democratic secular peaceful governments.

They should not flee till Berlin, They simply shall stop at Athene. I mean Its not like they bombing every house in Greece

Lot of them are economical migrants, believe it or not

Quote:

 

Ascertaining motivation is complex, but most of the migrants are refugees, fleeing war and persecution in countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Eritrea: according to UNHCR data, as of November 2015, 85% of Mediterranean Sea arrivals come from the world's top ten refugee-producing countries (52% from Syria, 19% from Afghanistan, 6% from Iraq, 5% from Eritrea, 2% from Somalia and 1% from Sudan). The top ten nationalities of Mediterranean Sea arrivals also include Nigeria (2%), Pakistan (2%), Gambia (1%) and Mali (1%).

Vast majority are genuine refugees fleeing war and persecution. What, they should stop at Athens? So Greece, a country already in a huge financial mess, should bare the burden of refugees? Not exactly a good plan.

Besides, most of the economic migrants come from places like the Balkans, West Africa and South Asia, but that's not the nationalities most people are complaining about.

lazerbem

Nov 14 2015, 04:43 PM

Cersei Lannister

Nov 14 2015, 03:07 PM

The only answer is military intervention on the ground, the risk of more organised attacks is too high to ignore it, popular opinion be damned, the only way is to go on the offensive. There are always downsides, but if military intervention is done right and a country secured, refugee numbers should go down as people choose to return home, when it's safe. Airstrikes are useless, they don't work on their own, they need ground support.

The refugee numbers wouldn't lessen that much. A country recovering from a war like that isn't the best economic prospect, they'd stay in Europe because hey, the economy is better and so is the welfare.

An offensive could obviously work, but it's had a history of not working when dealing with this kind of thing.

Cersei Lannister

Nov 14 2015, 07:51 PM

lazerbem

Nov 14 2015, 04:43 PM

Cersei Lannister

Nov 14 2015, 03:07 PM

The only answer is military intervention on the ground, the risk of more organised attacks is too high to ignore it, popular opinion be damned, the only way is to go on the offensive. There are always downsides, but if military intervention is done right and a country secured, refugee numbers should go down as people choose to return home, when it's safe. Airstrikes are useless, they don't work on their own, they need ground support.

The refugee numbers wouldn't lessen that much. A country recovering from a war like that isn't the best economic prospect, they'd stay in Europe because hey, the economy is better and so is the welfare.

An offensive could obviously work, but it's had a history of not working when dealing with this kind of thing.

Because previous invasions didn't really help people after and forced a political system upon a country that it wasn't really compatible with, governments kept collapsing. Public opinion in the west was against staying in these countries, it's an expensive operation but really, a country needs help rebuilding after war.

Yusuke

Nov 14 2015, 08:51 PM

From what i've read, French authorties were informed of a possible terroist attack for months right?

In any case, it's really sad to see what transpired. I just hope people don't turn to hate because of things like these.