Paris attacks.

[Mynight]

Just hope that platypus guy is not head of anything nevermind homeland security because he can't see how vetting immigrants is important in this day and age.

Unfortunately I imagine vetting people will only point out the low worry ones. The ones to really worry about wouldn't be flagged by such a process.

 

[Twirlywoos]

I was thinking of just this.

We love to take jibes at each other in a way only the British and French could, but they're strong allies, and its right we give them our full support over this.

I said earlier in the year Syria is France's problem hence why Britain has not been taking an active involvement, but people don't want to read:

http://www.historylearningsite.co.u...17-to-1973/the-sykes-picot-agreement-of-1916/

I wish they did

 

[Rofflay]

This is what i fear. The backlash after such an attack. The possible rise of nationalist partys in europe, and perhaps the violence against the islamic population in europe. All because a few simple minded idiots wish to push their agenda using violence. As someone who grew up during the worst years of the troubles in northern ireland. Violence achieved nothing but dead people on each side. Rip to those who died tonight.

Some will not deserve it and others will. Take this fella camped at Calais on 11th Nov 2015 for example.

Rick Mellang of “Yorkshire Aid” said: “We may be facilitating a rebellion at some point. Essentially, we distribute supplies which facilitate people to jump fences.

How the hell do you sort out the mess when people like him and the no borders activists are basically smuggling people illegally?

 

[gothic_hobbit]

Imagine if we had a 9/11 and we tried to blame Muslims? There would be a massive divide between the ******** and Muslims versus everyone else. Nothing is going to change drastically because we are mentally weak and the weak will be defeated. How many of us would have the guts to do a suicide attack?

Thought as much.

Maybe if, like these scum, I was indoctrinated from a very early age.

 

[JetMars]

You told me that the only requirement for telling the difference between someone in ISIS and a normal civilian was intelligence. I told you that they do not wear uniforms.

How do you tell the difference? I am keen to know.

Have you ever been faced with the threat of a warzone? Or any combat? By the way you post. I suggest you've not. I tell the difference in a number of way, the behaviour of the individual, body language, who else they associate themselves with and others factors.

 

[Mickie]

Without processing immigrants properly, how can you make that assessment ?

 

[Cambofrog]

Killing dozens of innocent people is not only easier but more effective, terrorism is all about creating terror among the general populace. Nothing says terror like not knowing if you're safe from being massacred just going about your usual Friday night plans...

But the odds are low to be taken out as an individual. What sort of effect is that going to have politicaly or ideologically. Individuals without power cannot make changes.

The key is in the name.

Yes, it's all terrorism whoever it's against. Taking out a big name political leader would surely be "better" than taking out a random.

 

[Gilly]

Have you ever been faced with the threat of a warzone? Or any combat? By the way you post. I suggest you've not. I tell the difference in a number of way, the behaviour of the individual, body language, who else they associate themselves with and others factors.

I have not, no.

You have the courage of conviction and for that, if nothing else, I applaud you. I make no sense of what you say but I can put that down to an emotional evening and being tired.

Be well, and don't break the rules here please.

 

[hurfdurf]

Have you ever been faced with the threat of a warzone? Or any combat? By the way you post. I suggest you've not. I tell the difference in a number of way, the behaviour of the individual, body language, who else they associate themselves with and others factors.

We need to get you to the Pentagon or MI5 asap, our top military officials are saying its the major problem and yet here you are, so easily able to be able to tell who to target, posting on OCUK forums!! Why have you not done more?!?!?!

 

[adolf hamster]

This is what i fear. The backlash after such an attack. The possible rise of nationalist partys in europe, and perhaps the violence against the islamic population in europe. All because a few simple minded idiots wish to push their agenda using violence. As someone who grew up during the worst years of the troubles in northern ireland. Violence achieved nothing but dead people on each side. Rip to those who died tonight.

Out in the fields just became a politically current song again.

No flag, no uniform, no colour or religion ever stopped a bullet from a gun.

The current thread debate about how to target isis effectively a case in point, how long before we cease to care and just start shooting everybody who prays to mecca, or wears a turban or hell just happens to be living a quiet life until the airstrikes arrive, at which point the only difference between us and isis will be the technology we have, the flag we fly, and what we write in the history books

 

[setter]

I grew up in northern ireland during some of the worst years of the troubles. Yes, it was very serious news most days of the week. Mainly in the cities, london/derry, belfast and in the rural area of south armagh. But, life had to go on even after parts of cities were devastated, many times the bombings were carried over to england. The ira achieved nothing despite the casualties and economic damage. An organisation now that is now steeped in drug dealing, illegal alcohol, tobacco, fuel, prostitution etc along with their loyalist cohorts.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

You know how tired I get of hearing this ****?

Seriously

Every other week now religion of peace is at it again spreading it's positivity.

Just close borders now and crack down on anything that slightly whiffs of extremism, enough of this nonsense.

 

[Mynight]

Yes, it's all terrorism whoever it's against. Taking out a big name political leader would surely be "better" than taking out a random.

Not really as they'll just be replaced by the morning. Majority of people dislike politicians and wouldn't grieve as much for them as the general public with whom they'd probably relate. A leader is seen as a big target and as such wouldn't inspire the concerns of just by sitting in a coffee shop whether you're about to become another victim just going about your day.

 

[Flibster]

President Hollande - We are going to lead a war which will be pitiless. Because when terrorists are capable of comitting such atrocities, they must be certain that they are facing a determined France, a united France, a France that is together, and does not let itself be moved, even if today we express infinite sorrow.

 

[Gilly]

I'm not sure I agree. If they can get to the political leader they can get to anyone.

 

[Mynight]

I'm not sure I agree. If they can get to the political leader they can get to anyone.

I do see that but if you're going to be afraid (which is what they want) would you be more worried about a targeted attack against the establishment or a seemingly random attack on civilians. Which one has the potential to affect you more? (Edit: should add ignoring the political/economical fallout post assassination).

To me an attack on say Cameron would indicate they're not that interested in attacking random people. Thus I wouldn't have any issues going about my business as normal be it on the underground or going to a social event. Not that it would stop me anyway.

(Probably just added my name to a watchlist )

Maybe I'm thinking about it in the wrong way..

 

[xxalxx]

President Hollande - We are going to lead a war which will be pitiless. Because when terrorists are capable of comitting such atrocities, they must be certain that they are facing a determined France, a united France, a France that is together, and does not let itself be moved, even if today we express infinite sorrow.

Boots on the ground?

 

[adolf hamster]

I grew up in northern ireland during some of the worst years of the troubles. Yes, it was very serious news most days of the week. Mainly in the cities, london/derry, belfast and in the rural area of south armagh. But, life had to go on even after parts of cities were devastated, many times the bombings were carried over to england. The ira achieved nothing despite the casualties and economic damage. An organisation now that is now steeped in drug dealing, illegal alcohol, tobacco, fuel, prostitution etc along with their loyalist cohorts.

I was about to say at least they've stopped shooting people, but then i'd be wrong lol. At least we've not got the muslim/non muslim hate thing going full swing because we've still not got rid of the green white and gold/red white and blue hate thing going.

 

[Gilly]

...

As a standalone incident i agree with you but if you get the leader as well as some seemingly random ones it truly can happen to anyone anywhere.

Scary as that is.

 

[Cambofrog]

Not really as they'll just be replaced by the morning. Majority of people dislike politicians and wouldn't grieve as much for them as the general public with whom they'd probably relate. A leader is seen as a big target and as such wouldn't inspire the concerns of just by sitting in a coffee shop whether you're about to become another victim just going about your day.

I agree that politcians are disliked in general

Anybody who kills to promote their point of view is obviously a complete ****.
As I said earlier, what is the point in them killing randoms without power?

Obviously we're not going to to like it, but what can we do?
I doubt if a terrorist gives a **** if we grieve or not.