yeah meant refugees

Why exactly did they leave the people in the stadium and continue to play the game? Was it to prevent hysteria and maintain crowd control? Was that the right call?

[Edited on November 15, 2015 at 10:46 AM. Reason : a]

11/15/2015 10:30:52 AM

That stadium was the most secure public place in the city at the time.

11/15/2015 10:49:10 AM

It is also a huge target that conveniently trapped thousands of citizens inside. I am just wondering if that is standard protocol or if that was improvised on the spot.

11/15/2015 12:21:19 PM

If I was in charge of that decision, I would've made the same call. Not saying that makes it the right call, just that it's what I would've done if in that crappy spot

11/15/2015 12:47:15 PM

yeah, but, the whole concept of letting the game go on while people are getting this shit on their phone?

I am sure that they have an emergency evac plan in place, just curious if there has been an analysis of that situation so far.

11/15/2015 12:54:30 PM

I wonder if anyone remembers when American conservatives condemned France for opposing the invasion of Iraq. You know, the whole "Freedom Fries" thing? Looks like France was correct in their opposition, given that the war led to the existence of ISIS in the first place. The same ISIS that is now responsible for attacking Paris.

11/15/2015 1:06:51 PM

The stadium was not a soft target it is a fortress. If there are 3 suicide bombers outside of the stadium, why would you send the people out there with them? Then the 2nd two bombs would have killed a lot more people. Theres no question it was the right call i dont see how anyone wouldnt see that.

11/15/2015 1:19:10 PM

^^ hence

Quote :

"Can we blame this on George W yet? Or are there so many disillusioned right wing "conservatives" around that still think Iraq was a good thing. I mean else else was Dick Cheney going to get $billions in defense contracts to his buddies!"

I like how many GOP candidates are blaming Obama for the current crisis and for not stepping with US troops. When...

1. It was their homeboy George W that created this power vacuum
2. Perhaps the EU or neighboring muslim countries should be taking the more active roll since they are the ones most affected.

11/15/2015 1:28:09 PM

Mmmmmmm...more active rolls

11/15/2015 1:48:53 PM

Quote :

"Sen. Lindsey Graham warned Sunday that "there is a 9/11 coming" if the United States does not play a leading role in a ground war against ISIS."

Seriously fuck this guy and his scare mongering. Let Russia or EU send their troops and fund the war to capitulate ISIS. They are the ones being directly affected.

I thought Republicans are super concerned about "debt ceilings" and conserving money.

11/15/2015 2:01:14 PM

Yeah the stadium was the best place to be. In fact one of the terrorists tried to get into the stadium but police discovered his vest and he blew it up outside during pursuit.

11/15/2015 2:12:33 PM

^^^^ in their mind the reason France gets attacked is their perceived weakness and unwillingness to fight.

I've seen smart people you and I both know make jokes about France surrendering already (military folks).

11/15/2015 2:26:50 PM

Quote :

"The targets included a command center, a recruitment center, an ammunition storage base and a training camp for the terror group, said Mickael Soria, press adviser for France's defense minister."

France is doing the exact opposite of surrendering.

My question is, if France knows where the ^ sites are, then why have we not already turned them into a pile of rubble?

11/15/2015 5:42:16 PM

if we blow enough shit up, eventually they'll begin to like us

11/15/2015 6:03:12 PM

^^ because we are worried about killing one innocent person

11/15/2015 7:00:09 PM

Actually, we SHOULD be worried about killing innocent people over there, considering that it is the single biggest recruiting tool for ISIS and related groups

11/15/2015 7:45:56 PM

Nm

[Edited on November 15, 2015 at 7:48 PM. Reason : Nm]

[Edited on November 15, 2015 at 7:50 PM. Reason : The point has already been made]

11/15/2015 7:46:53 PM

Saw 3 people on my Facebook post about French's 2 bombing runs, unfailingly people post "which our president was like France's" or something similar, seemingly oblivious the the fact we've been bombing for weeks, and the US has had almost 1700 bombing runs.

11/15/2015 8:30:59 PM

I really hope that France and some of these other EU states are pissed off enough to start calling out the Gulf Arab states for the countless billions they have spent on funding both terrorists and extremist clerics throughout the Arab world (because god knows all of our politicians are too chicken, too PC, or too stupid). I really think this is key to turning the tide on ISIS. These rich oil-fucks funded Bin-laden, and they sent the seed money for ISIS, I expect they have continued to funnel money to them through bogus Kuwait/Qatar charitable orgs. ISIS won't die out if we starve it of cash, but I personally believe it would be far more effective at slowing recruitment than bombing runs, which many have pointed out only seem to fuel recruitment.

The beauty of this strategy is it would cost very little, it would just take some intelligence work and then politicians continually calling them out at every opportunity.

11/15/2015 9:02:11 PM

Board I'm on with some Frenchies, this was posted up Friday, a tweet from a Benjamin Cazenoves:

"Je suis encore au Bataclan. 1e etage. Blessee grave! Qu ils donnent au plus vite I assault. Il y a des survivants a l interieur. Ils abattent tout le monde. Un par un. 1e etage vite!!!!"

Translation:

"I'm still inside the Bataclan. 1st floor seriously wounded woman. There are survivors inside. Tell the police forces to storm the building ASAP, we're slaughtered one by one. Quick!"

11/16/2015 11:38:32 AM

that was all over the front page of reddit

11/16/2015 11:42:58 AM

Judging by my FB feed, twitter and general comments on news stories ISIS succeeded in their mission completely.

Widespread paranoia, hatred and limiting of human rights. Someday we will learn; or not.

11/16/2015 4:08:16 PM

^ For Al Qaeda 9/11 was Huge Success.

- Scared soccer moms thought terrorists were living around every block ready to blow up the local Target.
- Airport screening became a nightmare for all americans.
- Programs like the NSA wiretapping ramped up leading to a trampling 4th amendment rights and trust in the government by many.
- School/church/[insert random org here] cancelled countless overseas trips (some even domestic if it required boarding an airplane) in fear of turrists attacking.

MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL

- 9/11 gave Bush the leverage needed to invade Iraq (who was not even linked to 9/11) with violence that fueled the fire of Islamic Jihad AND created a power vacuum that allowed ISIS to spawn.

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 5:52 PM. Reason : s]

11/16/2015 5:52:15 PM

11/16/2015 6:30:41 PM

Good Call

We already have enough free loaders here

11/16/2015 7:00:38 PM

just more of the typical "got mine" attitude we've seen from the right all along.

11/16/2015 7:32:16 PM

Except for I'm not on the Right

Nice try to slap a generic party label on me. Try Again!

11/16/2015 7:34:06 PM

right is not a party label. neither is left. They are simply describing your relative side on a broad spectrum of ideologies. Yes the republican party happens to be on the right, but so does some of the democrat party and many independents in this country.

11/16/2015 7:38:05 PM

Quote :

"^^ because we are worried about killing one innocent person"

This is wrong anyway. No civilians were killed in Paris' weekend bombing runs around Raqqa.

This brings the question. Why hadn't these targets been previously targetted? What have we been doing for the past year? Really makes me believe we are bombing for the sake of bombing forever just to keep buying more bombs.

11/16/2015 8:02:07 PM

Very little of my political views line with what is considered the "right".

The things few things I don't agree with the stereotypical liberals/left stance is the crying over hurt feelings of minorities because someone said the N-word at Mizzou or the feel that we need to just let a bunch of war refugees come flood into America.

Oh i typically support gun rights too, although i think we could improve regulations/oversight some to keep firearms out of the wrong hands.

Quote :

"No civilians were killed in Paris' "

I didn't realize the city of Paris had its own Air Force

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 8:05 PM. Reason : 2]

11/16/2015 8:04:35 PM

CNN reported that those were the targets that were scheduled to be bombed by the coalition that day. France just asked to do the bombing.

11/16/2015 8:07:29 PM

YAY FRANCE YOU DID YOUR PART!



W is proud

\

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 8:12 PM. Reason : a]

11/16/2015 8:11:09 PM

ISIS will continue to spread themselves out among civilian populations b/c they know we are much more reluctant to reach them there. Until we all agree that there will be some amount of civilian casualties if we want to try and wipe out the physical side of ISIS, then it will be a prolonged, useless fight.

And I realize that the accidental killing of civilians can be used as recruitment, but what else are we going to do.

11/16/2015 8:30:23 PM

So basically your "solution" will self-admittedly add to the problem.

I'm not saying I know the way to strangle ISIS but that clearly isn't working.

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 8:56 PM. Reason : And it's not accidental in the scenario you pose]

11/16/2015 8:55:37 PM

We should sing John Lennon's give peace a chance, offer them a free pick up truck, some McDonalds, and show them tolerance!

They will then throw down their guns and beg America to show them this democracy and freedom concept!

11/16/2015 8:58:07 PM

Clearly, we weren't worried about civilians when we the Allies leveled French towns attempting to drive out the Nazis. We weren't worried about civilians when bombing Berlin. We certainly weren't worried about the 100k civilians killed during the nuclear attacks in Japan.

Now I'm not saying we should rack up body counts just to rack them up. But to not fight intensely as we should because we are worried about civilian casualties is just naive. ISIS knows this, and they will use it. So unfortunately it is pretty much a lose-lose scenario for us.

And all this talk about Syrian refugees...I'm against letting them in, but if we are going to let them in, I'm all for only women and children. Let the men "man up" and go back and fight for their homeland if they really want ISIS out.

11/16/2015 9:08:16 PM

no Syrian refugees have been confirmed to have had anything to do with the Paris attack.

we've also been bombing ISIS targets for months now.

but for whatever reason, there are people who believe that the attacks were carried out by Syrian refugees and that we haven't been bombing ISIS targets.

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 9:24 PM. Reason : .]

11/16/2015 9:22:04 PM

This isn't a real war and ISIS is not a formidable threat like Japan and Germany. The civilians killed in WW2 were less than the amount they prevented. The war in terror is exactly the opposite. Terrorist attacks kill a very small amount of people.

For example, we would have been better off letting anoter 9/11 happen than going into Afghanistan. The Iraq war was also worse than 9/11 for us. We would have been much better off doing nothing militarily even if two more 9/11s happened.

Meanwhile, Germany and Japan were going to kill millions of people if they were not stopped.

11/16/2015 9:23:01 PM

To be clear, it's far from a right or left and republican and democratic thing going on here but we are so clearly headed to another disaster of a military campaign that does far more harm than good... or at least it appears so to me.

11/16/2015 9:25:00 PM

From Facebook:

Quote :

"If every cop can't be held responsible for the acts of a few bad ones, every white male can't be held responsible for slavery or every mass murder, every Jew can't be held responsible for crucifying Jesus, every black person isn't a criminal/thug THEN EVERY MUSLIM ISNT A TERRORIST AND CAN NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ISOLATED ACTS OF TERRORISM!!! Ugh. Do NOT let the media feed irrational thoughts."

11/16/2015 9:51:05 PM

Quote :

"no Syrian refugees have been confirmed to have had anything to do with the Paris attack."

Confirmed is the key word there, as it's too soon to confirm very much at this point, but still:

Quote :

"6. Ahmad Al Mohammad A Syrian passport with the name Ahmad Al Mohammad was found with one of the suicide bombers at the soccer stadium, and Greek officials say that the same passport had been registered by a refugee in Greece. This raises the possibility that at least one of the attackers may have entered Europe as a migrant. On Saturday, the Serbian newspaper Blic reported that the passport belonged to a 25-year old Syrian born in Idlib, and published this scan: Blic also reports that the man carrying this passport entered Serbia on October 7, after having entered Greece on October 3. Additional reporting by The Guardian indicates the passport was then scanned again in Croatia and Austria after that. On Monday, the Paris prosecutor's office confirmed that the passport was found at the scene, and said the attacker's fingerprints match those of someone who traveled through Greece in October. Other details about his travels through Europe have not been confirmed. It is worth noting that due to the value of Syrian passports in the migrant community, it's possible that the passport's original owner and the attacker are not the same person, just as it's possible the passport was stolen or could be a forgery. Regardless, this connection is sure to become a political wildfire in Europe, which is in the midst of the biggest refugee crisis since World War II. (Earlier reports had indicated that two Syria passports were found among the Paris attackers, but there now seems to have been only one.) "

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 9:58 PM. Reason : also some of the attackers are yet to be identified ]

11/16/2015 9:52:15 PM

one would hope that a rational human being with even the smallest bit of critical thinking skills wouldn't want to ban admitting refugees from a war torn country, especially without confirmation

even with confirmation, it's flawed logic

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 10:02 PM. Reason : but fear tends to win out]

11/16/2015 10:01:02 PM

What kind of real confirmation can be done?

Look, I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't take in any refugees. I'm just saying make sure we bring in the women and children, and let the men go fight for their country.

11/16/2015 10:30:18 PM

fuck families.

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 10:55 PM. Reason : sarcasm directed towards the notion that we only accept women and children]

11/16/2015 10:32:19 PM

^^^You understand why they are running in the first place right?

Understandably, there is a lot of misinformation about ISIS in this thread. I HIGHLY recommend reading the following article. It is very long, but gives great insight into ISIS, what they want, and how they differ from Al-queda.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 10:54 PM. Reason : 1]

11/16/2015 10:46:31 PM

"sorry, sir. we realize that in America we don't have a draft that would force our citizens to enlist, but we're going to have to ask you to abandon your family, go back to the country you're fleeing your murderous dictator from, and not only fight against his army, but ISIS as well. best of luck"

11/16/2015 10:54:41 PM

Quote :

""Can we blame this on George W yet? Or are there so many disillusioned right wing "conservatives" around that still think Iraq was a good thing. I mean else else was Dick Cheney going to get $billions in defense contracts to his buddies!""

Trump is disillusioned and still blames W

11/16/2015 10:54:48 PM

Quote :

"The civilians killed in WW2 were less than the amount they prevented."

11/16/2015 11:01:31 PM

Quote :

"one would hope that a rational human being with even the smallest bit of critical thinking skills wouldn't want to ban admitting refugees from a war torn country, especially without confirmation"

I'm with you in spirit, but are you advocating the US admits all refugees from every war torn country?

[Edited on November 16, 2015 at 11:12 PM. Reason : V "New Zealand First Leader" according to google]

11/16/2015 11:07:59 PM

Quote :

"I'm just saying make sure we bring in the women and children, and let the men go fight for their country. "

Wtf, how do you envision this working??? Also, is there some right winger preaching this, because this is the 2nd time I've seen this obviously bad idea floated.

We also have major newspapers questioning software that uses encryption (which is literally just math).

Rand Paul just announced a bill to restrict refugees from war torn countries, when so far it seems like most or all of the Paris terrorists were French or Belgian.

I know fear causes people's brains to shut down, but you'd think this clamp would release at some point.

11/16/2015 11:09:27 PM