Or far left, or let's just call them what they really are, lunatics, freaks of nature, unstable people.
left, right, ISIS are just synonyms not really a label we can use to branch people who find these acts of violence ok.
General / Off-Topic Another van attack
- Thread starter Robin of Spiritwood
- Start date
Or far left, or let's just call them what they really are, lunatics, freaks of nature, unstable people.
left, right, ISIS are just synonyms not really a label we can use to branch people who find these acts of violence ok.
Age has no relationship with old age ... what? Do you even read what you're writing?
"Numerical age is not correlated with infirmity or elderliness as much as the attitude of the person" is what he might be going for.
I was talking about age in the head. Have you even read what I was writing ?
Last edited:
Macron calls all the responsible of Islam in France to take their part in the "fight" against the "hate preachers" and the "identitarian closure".
It is true that this fight is largely ignored by Muslim leaders in France
The President of the Republic thanked the Muslim leaders for their condemnation of the jihadist attacks which have killed 239 people in France since January 2015.
This is really the minimum that the leaders of Islam in France can do. This is completely normal. Why thank ?
The training of imams, must be done on French soil and in a way adapted to the values of the Republic, declared Macron -----
I have always said that the laws of the Republic are superior to the laws of Islam in France. No sharia, no sharia courts as in the UK, no burqa, no separation between men and women in public swimming pools, no veil in the public administrations, no prayer in the street as we see in the parks of London. Islam in France must be subject to the principles of the Republic and Western values
It is true that this fight is largely ignored by Muslim leaders in France
The President of the Republic thanked the Muslim leaders for their condemnation of the jihadist attacks which have killed 239 people in France since January 2015.
This is really the minimum that the leaders of Islam in France can do. This is completely normal. Why thank ?
The training of imams, must be done on French soil and in a way adapted to the values of the Republic, declared Macron -----
I have always said that the laws of the Republic are superior to the laws of Islam in France. No sharia, no sharia courts as in the UK, no burqa, no separation between men and women in public swimming pools, no veil in the public administrations, no prayer in the street as we see in the parks of London. Islam in France must be subject to the principles of the Republic and Western values
Last edited:
Nah, he implied that I'm forgetful and somehow connected that to a weird 'mental age' concept.
Yeah, I've read what you have written and it doesn't make any sense.
I can not do anything for you if you have no sense of the joke. I teased you, without any wickedness
Last edited:
Meanwhile Brussels has proved that Soldiers are in Fact able to Prevent Casualties.
Not quite true. If the terrorist's suitcase had properly exploded, there would have been more than 10 deaths. And may be the military with them. It is normal that a soldier is able to defend himself against an attacker. I do not see anything extraordinary here, and it is the minimum
Last edited:
It is.
The Terrorist after losing his Bomb went to Attack.
Now the Bomb as it was an Initial Strike was not Preventable by the Soldier. To begin with thats the Polices Job.
But that Initial Strike is not Relevant here. Nor is its Outcome.
The Terrorist after that went on the Attack. Meaning if not for there being a Soldier which he then Attacked and got Killed. He would have Attacked Random Civilians in the Chaos and possibly caused further Casualties as well as further Chaos.
As I said before.
Soldiers Limit Damage. They dont Prevent Attacks. (except in terms of Scaring People)
its similar to Video Cameras. They dont Prevent Crimes. But they help alot to Clear them up afterwards.
This is the case here.
After the Initial Attack happened. The Soldier stopped the Terrorist before he could do any further Damage and/or escape.
Aah ! but I agree ! In France we have a state of emergency since two years and 10 000 soldiers in the streets. Brussels has proved nothing at all. France has proved before
Last edited:
Aah ! but I agree ! In France we have a state of emergency since two years and 10 000 soldiers in the streets. Brussels has proved nothing at all. France has proved before
I wont claim its the first of these cases in General on this. lol xD
Its merely the First Case since I had that Discussion in the Forum. And thus provided me an excellent example.
Its also an Good example because its nice and easy to explain because the Terrorist effectively went onto further Attacks and a Soldier Stopped these Further Attacks thus Limiting Damage and Preventing the Chaos and Ensuing Witchhunts we have seen after other such Attacks.
That's why I do not understand why there are people who are against the military in the street
That's why I do not understand why there are people who are against the military in the street
Well for Germany I assume its because of the Past.
Military in the Streets is still too much considered a sign of Suppression than Protection.
People feel the Soldiers are there to Watch them. Rather than being there to Watch over them.
Aside from that no Idea.
But I got Military in the Family so I by default consider the Military as Allies. So i might not be the best to be asked for what Worries people have on it.
That's why I do not understand why there are people who are against the military in the street
Since I'm assuming you are referring back to my comments...
It's not about the soldiers, they are just people, and most of us now live in countries where guns in the hands of authorities are a commonplace sight, and the London Bridge attackers were all shot by armed police who are now often seen around London and elsewhere.
It's the fact that there is a need to live in a 'state of emergency' and have the military on the streets in order to feel safe. That is what I am surprised that people are happy about.
That's why I do not understand why there are people who are against the military in the street
Because military do not do civil law enforcement.
It's the fact that there is a need to live in a 'state of emergency' and have the military on the streets in order to feel safe. That is what I am surprised that people are happy about.
I do not believe that people are really happy about the state of emergency but they are reassured in this difficult period
Since I'm assuming you are referring back to my comments...
It's not about the soldiers, they are just people, and most of us now live in countries where guns in the hands of authorities are a commonplace sight, and the London Bridge attackers were all shot by armed police who are now often seen around London and elsewhere.
It's the fact that there is a need to live in a 'state of emergency' and have the military on the streets in order to feel safe. That is what I am surprised that people are happy about.
They are not.
And Terrorism is not a Civil Offense
Terrorism is an Military Act of Aggression where Military Equipment and Tactics are Used to Attack the Enemy Population and Infrastructure.
And thats why Terrorism is exactly what we have Soldiers for.
People need to Realize this.
ISIS is not some Drug Cartel which is out for Profit and which in essence is much weaker than the Police thus resorting to Covert Attacks to secure their Business and keep People including Police away.
Terrorist Attacks are not Assassinations Aimed to prevent Detection by Authorities or Scare Wittnesses and People from acting against them.
ISIS is an Hostile Country that Declared War on us.
And their Target is to Conquer us.
And to this End they use Terror Attacks and Sabotage to cause Damage and Fear amongst us.
ISIS Tactic is the same as what Churchill tried to do against Germany in WW2.
Break Enemy Fighting Spirit by Attacking Civilians instead of Facing the Enemy Army in the Field.
And we got pretty much four Choices here.
1.
We Ignore it. And Continue to pretend being unaffected. That will work but will also cause alot of Hatred against any sort of Islam and will cause Civil Unrest and Racism to continue being on the Rise.
2.
We give in to Racism. And thus throw out anyone not Firmly Accepting the Local Culture and abandoning Islam and Eastern Culture. As well as closing our Borders. This will prevent further increase of Nationalism but will cause massive Civil Unrest (morale issues and immigrant population as well as diplomacy) and also severely damage our Economy.
3.
We do it like the USA. Turning our Police and Intelligence into Para Military Forces which are effectively Soldiers in all but Name and which put the State under Surveillance to prevent Terrorism as well as shooting to kill when Dealing with Terrorism.
But that will mean just like the USA our local Law Enforcement will be heavily Militarized and Criminals will start to compete with that to Continue Business. Leading us to an Similar Situation as we got in the USA where Police Shoots 100 people daily.
4.
We stop with the Pretense of Grandeur. We come down from our high and mighty throne and start considering ISIS an actual Country which (as they factually did) declared War on us. And Deal with it once and for all.
Including that we do what we would do in any other War. And Protect our Installations and Populations against Military Strikes using our own Military until the Enemy has been Crushed.
You say you dont want to Life in a Permanent State of Emergency.
But as long as ISIS exists we effectively have an State of Emergency.
See. If lets say New Zealand suddenly Declared War on Japan.
Despite the Fact that New Zealand would be no Threat at all. You can assume Japan would place Military to Protect its People and go there to Crush New Zealand.
So why are we trying to Ignore ISIS down there and pretend that this is some sort of Criminal Issue limiting our Response to Local Police?????
All we do by this is to drag out this Conflict and allow ISIS to cause more and more Damage.
Worse. By dragging it out and not accepting ISIS as an Full Enemy. We divert the Conflict onto Cultural and Religious Issues thus demonizing the Muslime in our Country because people start seeing Islam as Enemy rather than ISIS.
If we dont start seeing ISIS as the Enemy Country it is. We are pretty much begging for our people to do the same and thus consider this an Racial/Religious War rather than an Enemy Country.
We need to Start Protecting People from Attacks. And we need to Send our Military to Crush ISIS once and for all to Cut off the Source of these Attacks.
This is not the Polices Job anymore