Paris under terrorist attack.

[JNort]

Ongoing, currently 40 reported dead 60 injured. Multiple coordinated attacks

[luburch]

This is absolutely horrifying. News about so many attacks coming out. Hopefully there are no more.

[weezie]

Very unnerving. Poor souls...please stop the bloodshed.

[duke74]

All civilized beings are grieving with our French allies and friends. Regardless of political differences, we share a common, barbarian enemy. Tonight Je suis de Paris; Je suis français.

[moonpie23]

Isis claims responsibility.

[BD80]

Isis claims responsibility.

Then let the world hold them responsible

[flyingdutchdevil]

My wife is French. I lived in Paris for 4 years in high school (and the first two years of college my family still lived in Paris). I got married in Bordeaux a few years back. With these attacks, I am clearly disgusted, horrified, and shocked by the magnitude of these attacks. I hope Parisians are able to successfully cope, and I'm sure they will. There really isn't more to say about these attacks.

Sadly, however, I am not surprised that this has happened to France. Again. France's counter-terrorism unit has not been successful nor has it seen the returns. After Charlie Hebdo, France increased their counter-terrorism budget to over 30 billion Euros a year. And it sadly has proven to be ineffective as France is a target time and time again (Charlie Hebdo, TGV attack, last night). Hollande's State of Emergency last night was a good call, but I hope Hollande reviews both France's internal and external policies regarding terrorism.

Pray for the Parisians, and hope that these events never happen again.

[weezie]

Then let the world hold them responsible

Right. And let's start calling it "murder." These are cold-blooded, pre-meditated murders.

[davekay1971]

Right. And let's start calling it "murder." These are cold-blooded, pre-meditated murders.

First of all, my prayers are for the French people, the victims and their loved ones.

And let's start calling it war. It takes only one side to declare war. That side has defined who their enemies are (loudly and publicly), and determined their tactics (seen all too often and ever more frequently). That side is not a traditional nation-state; they have not defined their enemies by traditional nation-state definitions, and their tactics are not conventional military tactics. So it's an unconventional war, declared unilaterally, and fought by unconventional means. But it's still a war, and, although civilized people can hope and pray this kind of thing will stop, the reality is that it won't stop, until the war is won, and the ideology behind it is marginalized to the point of an irrelevant few who are too few in number and to scared to cause any real damage.

[freshmanjs]

First of all, my prayers are for the French people, the victims and their loved ones.

And let's start calling it war. It takes only one side to declare war. That side has defined who their enemies are (loudly and publicly), and determined their tactics (seen all too often and ever more frequently). That side is not a traditional nation-state; they have not defined their enemies by traditional nation-state definitions, and their tactics are not conventional military tactics. So it's an unconventional war, declared unilaterally, and fought by unconventional means. But it's still a war, and, although civilized people can hope and pray this kind of thing will stop, the reality is that it won't stop, until the war is won, and the ideology behind it is marginalized to the point of an irrelevant few who are too few in number and to scared to cause any real damage.

Obviously, it would be great to marginalize the ideology. How would you propose to do that?

[OldPhiKap]

5700

Don't give up. Don't ever give up.

[Troublemaker]

Obviously, it would be great to marginalize the ideology. How would you propose to do that?

Haha, the answer to your question is, by definition, discussion of public policy that is probably controversial, to boot, and such discussion is expressly disallowed by the owners and moderators of this forum.

I don't recommend Dave answer that, haha.

My prayers and thoughts to Parisians.

[davekay1971]

Obviously, it would be great to marginalize the ideology. How would you propose to do that?

It's tough and I don't pretend to have the best, or even right answers. To avoid proceeding too far down the PPB rabbit hole I will PM you my thoughts.

Agreed, Troublemaker! Your name is not apt today.

[duke79]

First of all, my prayers are for the French people, the victims and their loved ones.

And let's start calling it war. It takes only one side to declare war. That side has defined who their enemies are (loudly and publicly), and determined their tactics (seen all too often and ever more frequently). That side is not a traditional nation-state; they have not defined their enemies by traditional nation-state definitions, and their tactics are not conventional military tactics. So it's an unconventional war, declared unilaterally, and fought by unconventional means. But it's still a war, and, although civilized people can hope and pray this kind of thing will stop, the reality is that it won't stop, until the war is won, and the ideology behind it is marginalized to the point of an irrelevant few who are too few in number and to scared to cause any real damage.

I think you're right.......and it won't be easy to effectively win this "war" and to marginalize the warped (IMO) ideology behind these attacks. But the civilized nations of the world certainly have the resources to do the job, and just need the will and motivation and organization to do it!! This is NOT like fighting the Nazis and Japanese in WW II.

[Furniture]

I hate war but I would be all for a coalition of countries going to Syria and Iraq to kill all those bastards!!!

[duke74]

I hate war but I would be all for a coalition of countries going to Syria and Iraq to kill all those bastards!!!

Agree, but unfortunately, this Jihadist movement knows no state boundaries. Witness Kenya and Tanzania in the 90s, Madrid in the 80s, New York on Sept 11th, London in 2005, and even at sea - the Cole in 2000.

Asymmetric warfare against a protean foe is difficult. "Winning the hearts and minds" just isn't a viable strategy against those of that mindset. It only MIGHT work to isolate the perpetrators from their own, and thus reduce the support of the "mainstream" who, to date, have not been overly vocal in distaste for those actions.

Sorry if bordering on PPB discussion, mods.

[BD80]

I hate war but I would be all for a coalition of countries going to Syria and Iraq to kill all those bastards!!!

Identifying the bastards by asking them to raise their hands?

[sagegrouse]

Obviously, it would be great to marginalize the ideology. How would you propose to do that?


Obviously, it would be great to marginalize the ideology. How would you propose to do that?

The number one spreader of Muslim extremism is Saudi Arabia, through its exportation of Wahhibism through the creation of schools (madrasas) throughout Asia and the Middle East teaching the most intolerant form of Islam. This support of medieval beliefs in Saudi Arabia was a compromise with religious fundamentalists when the Kingdom itself was threatened from within.

As HuffPo said following the Charlie Hebdo massacre:


It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.

For long-run effects, it is necessary to rein in the Saudis, which I think we can do. In the short-run, we have to deal with ISIS.

[davekay1971]

The number one spreader of Muslim extremism is Saudi Arabia, through its exportation of Wahhibism through the creation of schools (madrasas) throughout Asia and the Middle East teaching the most intolerant form of Islam. This support of medieval beliefs in Saudi Arabia was a compromise with religious fundamentalists when the Kingdom itself was threatened from within.

As HuffPo said following the Charlie Hebdo massacre:



For long-run effects, it is necessary to rein in the Saudis, which I think we can do. In the short-run, we have to deal with ISIS.

Amazing post, Sage. Very informative.

[JBDuke]

Please keep this out of the realm of public policy. Expressing sympathy with Parisian victims, updating with news of the events and the aftermath - these are fine. Getting into what should be done about taking the fight to the terrorists needs to stay off these boards.