|
Keep the discussion ON TOPIC. This thread is for discussing the terror attacks in Paris. |
On November 14 2015 09:47 Warfie wrote: It's astonishing to think about how the football stadium attack could have caused so many more casualties. Had it exploded in the queue outside or when people were leaving the game..
Yeah, we can thank inebriation and loud music for the fact that there hasn't been a stampede.
|
On November 14 2015 09:49 m4ini wrote: Sky News actually being confused by what "borders closed" meant.
Airports and railways still open and uninterrupted, so "closed border" isn't actually happening.
In most places you can enter but you cannot leave.
|
Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be?
|
oh my god. more than 100 hostages killed...
|
On November 14 2015 09:49 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:47 m4ini wrote:There is no difference, Islamic state will not stop inspiring attacks or carrying them out directly as long as it isn't defeated. Because we all know, there was no nazis anymore after Hitler died. But how about you explain how "a full force occupation and invasion" would've prevented this here attack. That'd be a start. are you really saying that nazis were more of a problem after Hitler's death/Germany's defeat rather than before?!
Are you saying that terrorists are as big a problem as Nazi germany was?
You see how idiotic your (deliberately dense) "argument" is?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
homegrown is not likely given their familiarity with aks
|
On November 14 2015 09:51 SoSexy wrote: Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be?
What part of this is delusional?
|
On November 14 2015 09:48 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:33 Yuljan wrote:On November 14 2015 09:30 DickMcFanny wrote:On November 14 2015 09:28 Yuljan wrote: Well I hope France calls for Nato as the US did after 9.11. What the fuck are you on about? Calling the NATO against whom? The French population? ISIS would be a start after that Saudi Arabia and the other gulf states who provide the financial support. NATO attacking Saudi Arabia? I want some of what you're smoking. Saudi Arabia owns most of the NATO, you do realise the USA make up more than two thirds of it?
I did not say it is likely but a man can dream. If France shows some balls and draws a link between the attacks and Saudis Arabia it would be hard for even the US to wiggle out of it. Alliance obligations and such. Its not like Afghanistan had a large part in 9/11 other than housing Bin Laden.
|
On November 14 2015 09:47 Warfie wrote: It's astonishing to think about how the football stadium attack could have caused so many more casualties. Had it exploded in the queue outside or when people were leaving the game.. they apparently tried to storm the stadium, but were unsuccesssful. other rumors set into the world from french players say that the president was presumably the goal of the attack in some way or fashion.
nothing confirmed though, and msot likely won't be confirmed as the attackers are either dead or more willing to die than to talk.
|
On November 14 2015 09:48 Ragnarork wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:48 Makro wrote:On November 14 2015 09:44 Ragnarork wrote:On November 14 2015 09:41 Makro wrote:On November 14 2015 09:35 ref4 wrote:On November 14 2015 09:30 Makro wrote:On November 14 2015 09:25 WhiteDog wrote:On November 14 2015 09:23 caelym wrote: Earlier I was reading 100 hostages in Bataclan, now I'm seeing 100 dead in Bataclan. Did the raid completely fail? There were 1500 people in the Bataclan, the raid worked : the guy even used grenades to kill hostages. It's a civil war. civil war is an understatement, people don't realize that you have thousands of people in france that want to do the same the civil war has started and no one want to admit it if you have your whole military that is in the street something is wrong so what are the fractions? French government vs. Shia extremists vs. Sunni extremists vs ISIS agents? this is a civil war the terrorist are french who have different belief the images i'm watching are irrealistic, you have military people at every corner of the street, this is a state of war A handful of people doesn't make it a civil war. This is terrorism, nothing more. handful of people ? we talk about thousand of people Wait what? There's only a handful of people running with guns in Paris right now, I don't see a whole militia. Jeez, I'm afraid of what you could be thinking right now. i'm just sad right now if you want to know what i'm thinking
if you don't want to see how things are then that's your right, call it only terrorism if you do but when you have thousands of french citizen that pledge allegiance to an other form of authority and are ready to take arm to shoot randomly people in the street, then indeed this is a civil war
you have the whole army in paris, check the previous terrorist attack dozen of years ago and what you only saw was mostly the police
|
On November 14 2015 09:52 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:51 SoSexy wrote: Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be? What part of this is delusional?
How he wants to believe it's not carried out by muslim terrorists?
Do you want to make a bet? I bet 100 euros that this attack was not done by Hinduist nor Gianist nor Protestant terrorists.
|
On November 14 2015 09:51 SoSexy wrote: Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be? I think Barack Obama might be the most informed person on any thing anywhere on Earth. If he isn't sure that it's ISIS, then it's pretty unclear. Or he's lying, which is also a possibility
|
On November 14 2015 09:52 Yuljan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:48 DickMcFanny wrote:On November 14 2015 09:33 Yuljan wrote:On November 14 2015 09:30 DickMcFanny wrote:On November 14 2015 09:28 Yuljan wrote: Well I hope France calls for Nato as the US did after 9.11. What the fuck are you on about? Calling the NATO against whom? The French population? ISIS would be a start after that Saudi Arabia and the other gulf states who provide the financial support. NATO attacking Saudi Arabia? I want some of what you're smoking. Saudi Arabia owns most of the NATO, you do realise the USA make up more than two thirds of it? I did not say it is likely but a man can dream. If France shows some balls and draws a link between the attacks and Saudis Arabia it would be hard for even the US to wiggle out of it. Alliance obligations and such. Its not like Afghanistan had a large part in 9/11 other than housing Bin Laden.
One thing is attacking weak and insignificant Afghanistan.. other is attacking the oil producing powerhouse that is SAudi Arabia... also the link have been made long ago, are you going to attack Qatar as well? and other gulf states ?... It would lead us into a world war.
|
|
|
On November 14 2015 09:51 SoSexy wrote: Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be? Barack Obama is no dummy. But like has been said earlier, you can't just yell "ISIS!" any moment there's violence committed by Muslim extremists.
|
On November 14 2015 09:47 Warfie wrote: It's astonishing to think about how the football stadium attack could have caused so many more casualties. Had it exploded in the queue outside or when people were leaving the game.. Actually it is not if you know about the place. It has heavy security everytime there is a match. Imo the attack on the stadium was a suicide attempt and the terrorist knew they had no chance of actually entering.
|
On November 14 2015 09:51 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:49 SoSexy wrote:On November 14 2015 09:47 m4ini wrote:There is no difference, Islamic state will not stop inspiring attacks or carrying them out directly as long as it isn't defeated. Because we all know, there was no nazis anymore after Hitler died. But how about you explain how "a full force occupation and invasion" would've prevented this here attack. That'd be a start. are you really saying that nazis were more of a problem after Hitler's death/Germany's defeat rather than before?! Are you saying that terrorists are as big a problem as Nazi germany was? You see how idiotic your (deliberately dense) "argument" is?
You are just spouting non sequitur. The comparison is so out of place historically that I won't even reply.
|
On November 14 2015 09:54 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 09:52 Nebuchad wrote:On November 14 2015 09:51 SoSexy wrote: Sky News: 'Barack Obama says he does not want to speculate about who may be responsible for paris attacks'
How delusional can you be? What part of this is delusional? How he wants to believe it's not carried out by muslim terrorists? Do you want to make a bet? I bet 100 euros that this attack was not done by Hinduist nor Gianist nor Protestant terrorists.
Please illustrate, using Obama's words, the notion that he doesn't want to believe it's carried out by muslim terrorists.
|
Zurich15362 Posts
I just came home. This is one piece of news to immediately sober up a drunk party goer. What terrible news to come home to. I am genuinely concerned what will happen with my dear neighbors now.
|
Holy crap...no wonder reddit is crashing. This is insane...
|
|
|
|
|
|