Paris attacks.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Occam's razor. We know who it is. Simultaneous gun, bomb and grenade attacks = not a lone wolf nutter or the boulangerie worker's union.
 
Rofflay said:
Yes because we would have to work to feed the scum. Deportation honestly i do not care if we build sand islands like in the south China sea or use fulton baloons to drop them in the Arctic.

Just get them out before everyone becomes radicalized.
Click to expand...

The question is likely to be who is causing the radicalisation. That is only feasible if it is someone within the country.

It also takes quite good surveillance to catch those people.

Unless you are talking about deporting people based on something else.
 
Rofflay said:
Yes because we would have to work to feed the scum. Deportation honestly i do not care if we build sand islands like in the south China sea or use fulton baloons to drop them in the Arctic.

Just get them out before everyone becomes radicalized.
Click to expand...

Who is the 'they' you are referring to exactly?
 
Nitefly said:
Nothing wrong with speculating though. Civilian attacks = also certainly terrorism. What are the big terrorist groups active at the moment who are featured frequently in the news for terrorism - not exactly wildly offensive speculations here!

That's different from 'dey took our jerbs'. If people get it wrong, they get it wrong *shrug*
Click to expand...

Speculation is fine I think and only to be expected. We can probably all see what happened here now at the base level, no question it's a terror attack, one can therefore assume the likely candidates of such a crime. Now we need to hope their death is quick but painful and without further innocents getting hurt.
 
Rofflay said:
Yes because we would have to work to feed the scum. Deportation honestly i do not care if we build sand islands like in the south China sea or use fulton baloons to drop them in the Arctic.

Just get them out before everyone becomes radicalized.
Click to expand...

Or, you know, we could look at the drivers of radicalisation and address those issues, but I do agree that an approach that ignores the causes is probably the most sensible.
 
It can not be the religion of peace! Islam is peace. Some random real Muslim man standing outside a mosque will be on the news tomorrow to say the gunmen are not real Muslims, as Islam is peace.
 
Raz said:
Or, you know, we could look at the drivers of radicalisation and address those issues, but I do agree that an approach that ignores the causes is probably the most sensible.
Click to expand...


You mean the verses in the Quran? The only solution is to convert or pay the Jizya tax. So which one do you want?

It can not be the religion of peace! Islam is peace. Some random real Muslim man standing outside a mosque will be on the news tomorrow to say the gunmen are not real Muslims, as Islam is peace.
Click to expand...

Yet the head of the whole religion beheaded people, Where as the head of Christianity preached tolerance. How the hell can those two ever be at peace?
 
Tosno said:
It can not be the religion of peace! Islam is peace. Some random real Muslim man standing outside a mosque will be on the news tomorrow to say the gunmen are not real Muslims as Islam is peace.
Click to expand...

Well what is your opinion? Is that man not a an actual reflection of Muslims? Instead terrorists are?
 
Uther said:
If this turns out to be more of what most people are probably assuming, I don't actually think there is a solution anymore. Just more pointless bloodshed and hatred ad infinitum.
Click to expand...

Well before we conclude that there isn't a solution, perhaps we should try some first. The problem is that many solutions are incompatible with the ultra-liberal, human rights movement that's subverted the country's legal and political system recently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom