At Least 120 Dead in Paris Attacks

[Tee Kay]

Eww Daily Express.

Why a nuke? Many innocent people live in the same area controlled by Isis, why doom them with further pain and suffering?

Each country needs to ask themselves two questions: are we at war or are we not, and with who?

If we're at war with ISIS, then it's war. Issue war goals or demand unconditional surrender, deal with their overseas operatives as spies, captured troops as PoWs, and conduct full-scale military operations with the aim of bringing about the submission or destruction of the enemy as soon as possible. And civilian casualties? It's war. Tough. We razed entire provinces to get the Axis to surrender. But expect retaliation.

If we're not at war, then stop it with the rhetoric and the bombing campaigns. Get out of there. Terrorism then becomes a law-enforcement issue. Treat it like organised crime.

Instead what we have now is a constant state of semi-war. We're at war, but not with anyone in particular. We're at peace, but the enemy could be anyone and anywhere. We're not at war with anyone in Syria in particular, but we bomb people there. Their civilian casualties are collateral damage, but ours are brutally murdered innocents, 'cause we're at peace. But we're also at war.

It's a perfect recipe for perpetual confusion and fear and benefits next to no one.

Are we at war or aren't we?

 

[Takhisis]

^

Spoiler :

Although i doubt many care about Poland either, tbh

It's in the brown section in your map.

Putin had to buy additional transport ships to supply even current base with a few thousands of personnel in total. Unless he intends to invade also Georgia and Turkey, Russia simply has no logistical capability to supply such expeditionary force overseas.

Eww Daily Express.

Yes, I'd wait for better sources, and Russia has a war right on their doorstep to fight anyway.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Yes, I'd wait for better sources, and Russia has a war right on their doorstep to fight anyway.

What, a source where the top headline has to do with UFO's in Antarctica isn't good?

 

[Takhisis]

I said a better source, not a good one. Also, haven't you watched The light of Zartha?

 

[Tee Kay]

The Daily Mail is a better source, and that says something.

 

[cybrxkhan]

French police/military/swat teams have apparently raided an appartment where the 8th suspect in the Paris Attacks was apparently staying or something. Seems like two people have died, including one woman who blew herself up with a vest, and several others including the suspect have barricaded and armed themselves. Several explosions and gunfire reported.

 

[AdrienIer]

The police has reported 5 arrests for now and only one dead (the woman with the vest)

 

[Akka]

Yes, I'd wait for better sources, and Russia has a war right on their doorstep to fight anyway.

The 150 000 soldiers figure makes the claims rather dubious, that is true.
On the other hand, I'd say that having another war on their doorstep is actually a reason for Russia to intervene : ISIL just managed to make everyone hate them so much that action against them would make Russia look good and people accept their support for Assad and let the whole Ukraine debacle be swept under the carpet.

 

[Takhisis]

Twitter hashtags are getting a bit weird, now it's #jesuischien.

On other saddening news, idiots recently used a bomb threat to have their exam cancelled last saturday. Wooo Argentina wooo!

 

[warpus]

And civilian casualties? It's war. Tough.

I don't think you realize this but this is exactly what ISIS hopes for. It would help them recruit new members a lot easier.

It wouldn't work, it'd be a PR nightmare, and what you're describing would basically amount to war crimes.. which in this day and age doesn't matter if you're the U.S. or Russia, but still.

 

[Flying Pig]

Eww Daily Express.



Each country needs to ask themselves two questions: are we at war or are we not, and with who?

If we're at war with ISIS, then it's war. Issue war goals or demand unconditional surrender, deal with their overseas operatives as spies, captured troops as PoWs, and conduct full-scale military operations with the aim of bringing about the submission or destruction of the enemy as soon as possible. And civilian casualties? It's war. Tough. We razed entire provinces to get the Axis to surrender. But expect retaliation.

If we're not at war, then stop it with the rhetoric and the bombing campaigns. Get out of there. Terrorism then becomes a law-enforcement issue. Treat it like organised crime.

Instead what we have now is a constant state of semi-war. We're at war, but not with anyone in particular. We're at peace, but the enemy could be anyone and anywhere. We're not at war with anyone in Syria in particular, but we bomb people there. Their civilian casualties are collateral damage, but ours are brutally murdered innocents, 'cause we're at peace. But we're also at war.

It's a perfect recipe for perpetual confusion and fear and benefits next to no one.

Are we at war or aren't we?

I'm going to leave aside for now the fact that we don't fight wars like that any more and take issue with the divide between war or not-war. That divide works well for defined states, with standing armies and clear areas of operations. It doesn't work for operations where the line between civilian and soldier is blurred. How many bombs do you have to drop on Syria to stop a teenager in Luton being convinced on the internet to become a suicide bomber? We've known for over half a century that you can't fight insurgencies and 'wars among the people' in the same way as conventional wars.

To give a simple illustration - if we demand unconditional surrender, who can give it? Who can tell every terrorist to stop plotting?

 

[Steph]

Latest report in the raid from French police: 3 terrorists dead (including a female kamikaze) and 7 arrested. 5 policemen wounded, I think from a grenade.

 

[Takhisis]

@Flying Pig: How do we deal with a bunch of people whom a psychiatrist would probably diagnose as clinically insane (the whole lot of them)? What sort of negotiation can we do with them, when they're simply a bunch of omnicidal maniacs? Pol Pot was only stopped when even the Viet Cong/North Vietnam got tired of him and he kept it up for another decade anyway, for one.

 

[Flying Pig]

I don't think that's what we're dealing with, though.

 

[Whomp]

I don't think that's what we're dealing with, though.

What is it that we are dealing with?

 

[El_Machinae]

Low-frequency low-cost terror attacks by small bands of people claiming one banner.

 

[chijohnaok]

'ISIS supporters' stab Jewish teacher in Marseille sparking fears of fresh wave of French terror attacks

Another example of jihadists attempting to stir up fear and resentment?

 

[innonimatu]

Low-frequency low-cost terror attacks by small bands of people claiming one banner.

This. Domestically, it is a police issue.

Internationally, I wouldn't be offended if material support from some state to these attacks was invoked as a casus belli for resorting to war to cut off such support. But it had better be proven beyond any doubt. And there are other means short of war to pressure governments to cease supporting enemies of other states.

Would french business forgo the profits from selling weapons (and other stuff) to those states, though? Would the french government go against the wishes if its big business? It's all connected...

 

[chijohnaok]

This. Domestically, it is a police issue.

Internationally, I wouldn't be offended if material support from some state to these attacks was invoked as a casus belli for resorting to war to cut off such support. But it had better be proven beyond any doubt. And there are other means short of war to pressure governments to cease supporting enemies of other states.

Would french business forgo the profits from selling weapons (and other stuff) to those states, though? Would the french government go against the wishes if its big business? It's all connected...

There are some limitations to treating it as a police issue.

If French authorities are able to trace the mastermind of the attack or those that provided material support to conduct the attacks, and those masterminds or supporters were in Raqqa, should the French authorities submit a request for extradition of those people to the Syrian government in Damascus? What exactly would that accomplish?

 

[Birdjaguar]

There is no solution. Just choices. How do we value money, the lives of our soldiers, the lives of those living in the IS, future security from terrorist attacks, access to the Middle East and its strategic purposes, our values etcetera.
We make those choices all the time, of course, one way or the other. It just is rarely done so in a manner that the supposed deciders - the people - or even the authorities themselves, potentially being caught up in idealogical narratives or rather social prestige mechanisms rather than reality themselves - are even aware of the full extend of those choices.

OK. What choices would you make or suggest that world leaders make?