BREAKING NEWS: Large Scale Terrorist Attack in France -- Multiple Explosions, Gunfire! Death toll at - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Billy-Bobfred;49113630]"miswording" thats your excuse every fucking time every goddam time why are you not permabanned for being a shitstirrer?[/QUOTE] He has an extensive history of shit posting and just got off a 1 month.

[QUOTE=DarklytheGreat;49113633]how much do you wanna bet that asteroid wouldnt have even said anything like that if iraq and lebanon were covered and not france[/QUOTE] I'm just catching up on this now so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "asteroid" but a western country cares about what happens within a [I]western country[/I] so if something happened within what westerners consider a warzone then we would think of it as general news, but if something happens within something we think of as generally a non-at-war country [I]then[/I] it's huge news.

The true colors of some of you have shown, and it's quite disturbing.

Its times like these when /pol/ really shines bright

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;49113651]The true colors of some of you have shown, and it's quite disturbing.[/QUOTE] Yeah, they're Red White and Blue. Vive la France

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;49113137]Attacking innocent civilians is a horrible thing to do. I just find it noteworthy and sad that so many people are willing to overlook a large portion of the victims of today's attacks because they want to push their xenophobic agenda.[/QUOTE] Whats honestly going through your head? Everyone sees the shit you post and knows how fucking retarded and backwards you are. Why do you continue to post with such a smug sense of attitude? You defend pedophiles, post regularly on gamerghazi, and shitpost on facepunch non-stop. What is wrong with you? A shitload of people are dead and you cannot stop shitposting for a few seconds? You are psychotic or some shit.

[QUOTE=Incoming.;49113589] There is an option you never mentioned, even though it seems fairly straightforward: Limit the amounts of refugees allowed to enter the border to a rate in which not only can services maintain their quality of care, but also at a pace that allows at least a rudimentary form of background check.[/quote] Yes, I absolutely did not mention that. Because mobilizing however many fleets it takes and sending them to patrol the Aegean and Italy's maritime borders will cost a shit-ton of money while still not guaranteeing that some poor excuse of a boat won't be able to float for a few miles off the coast of Turkey and reach some island like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kos]Kos[/url]. And this is without considering the fact that these boats tend to sink and you have to intervene ASAP. [quote]Even if background checks are deemed ineffective, this does not remove from the basic principle of government and its general purpose: A stable and safe environment. This means you can't shove hundreds of people into villages the size of a single street.[/quote] I argued for distribution, not inundating a single country or village with an uneven number of refugees. [quote]If no country wants them, then send them back to Egypt. [/quote] Unless Egypt has expressed interest in such an arrangement, you are arguing for using force to make them take them. And I already mentioned what that would result in: [quote]c) is pure daydreaming,[...] and they'll just try to get back into Europe anyway. b) [...] will be unable to care for millions of asylum seekers on their own, so they will just let them pass through anyway, and you are back to square one.[/quote] You are also assuming that Egypt is in any position to provide the basic necessities for any significant number of refugees. And finally, good luck with having to pay a fine or breaking away from the ICJ or something, because the last time Italy sent asylum seekers back to a non-EU country, they got penalized. [quote]Two wrongs don't make a right.[/quote] Forcing countries such as Lebanon and Jordan to deal with millions of refugees while we deal with a fraction of that is pretty wrong. [editline]14th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=DogGunn;49113619]Would you rather people act like Islam is at fault?[/QUOTE] I would rather you blamed ISIS.

If you own a Twitter account and actively support the actions of what happened today you can politely shove a cactus up your ass for all I care.

[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;49113737]If you own a Twitter account and actively support the actions of what happened today you can politely shove a cactus up your ass for all I care.[/QUOTE] IT'S CLEARLY THE REFUGEES FAULT LEFTIST SCUM DONALD TRUMP 2016

[QUOTE=phaedon;49113670]Yes, I absolutely did not mention that. Because mobilizing however many fleets it takes and sending them to patrol the Aegean and Italy's maritime borders will cost a shit-ton of money while still not guaranteeing that some poor excuse of a boat won't be able to float for a few miles off the coast of Turkey and reach some island like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kos]Kos[/url]. And this is without considering the fact that these boats tend to sink and you have to intervene ASAP. I argued for distribution, not inundating a single country or village with an uneven number of refugees. Unless Egypt has expressed interest in such an arrangement, you are arguing for using force to make them take them. And I already mentioned what that would result in: You are also assuming that Egypt is in any position to provide the basic necessities for any significant number of refugees. And finally, good luck with having to pay a fine or breaking away from the ICJ or something, because the last time Italy sent asylum seekers back to a non-EU country, they got penalized. Forcing countries such as Lebanon and Jordan to deal with millions of refugees while we deal with a fraction of that is pretty wrong. [editline]14th November 2015[/editline] I would rather you blamed ISIS.[/QUOTE] You ignored when I said "Granted, there are probably other solutions I can't conjure up, I still hold fast that destabilizing your own country is no way to do it." Distribution could resolve issues, yes, but that is not what is happening, nor does it remove all issues. Explain to me how you will distribute families? Is this on a per case basis? Because that is just as expensive as patrolling the sea. Egypt was just a placeholder, maybe I should have stated this, considering you decided to ignore the line formerly mentioned, except for the last few words in an attempt to cherry-pick my statements. "Forcing countries such as Lebanon and Jordan to deal with millions of refugees while we deal with a fraction of that is pretty wrong." Yes. Yes it is, but handling a mass refugee crisis as incompetently as it has been thus far is arguably worse. "c) is pure daydreaming,[...] and they'll just try to get back into Europe anyway. b) [...] will be unable to care for millions of asylum seekers on their own, so they will just let them pass through anyway, and you are back to square one." That's a bit biased. No doubt they would return, but not only could a stronger patrol dissuade second attempts, but is it not worth it, when it is now being shown that not all of these wonderful refugees abiding by national laws? This would make it easier to give humanitarian aid to those that need it. A nightclub had to bar refugees due to some of their behavior. There's two major routes being used, one of which is on land. That said, land is much easier to patrol than sea. It's silly to assume that you could stop all "poor excuses" for boats won't still get by, but is it not better to intervene? It's already been shown that a high number of these refugees are not as desperate as they would leave you to believe.

[QUOTE=Billy-Bobfred;49113536]Why do we follow human rights when we deal with these subhuman rats Burn them alive, bomb them , whatever If they don't want to be nice why do we have to tiptoe around all the poor civilams they disguise themselves as[/QUOTE] But then you'd stoop to their level. That's bad.

I was looking over news coverage, and many are reporting that nobody's taken credit for it yet. The reports of screaming "Allahu ackbar" also seem to have faded away - might have been false to begin with. Islamic terrorists are certainly highest on the probability list, and the M.O. fits, but it's not impossible it was some other group entirely. Does anyone have [I]definitive[/I] evidence it was ISIS or something like that?

[QUOTE=phaedon;49113670]Because mobilizing however many fleets it takes and sending them to patrol the Aegean and Italy's maritime borders will cost a shit-ton of money while still not guaranteeing that some poor excuse of a boat won't be able to float for a few miles off the coast of Turkey and reach some island like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kos]Kos[/url]. And this is without considering the fact that these boats tend to sink and you have to intervene ASAP.[/QUOTE] And feeding and housing however many refugees doesn't cost a shit-ton of money, while also creating various issues caused by clashes of cultures and negatively impacting citizens of nations who are displaced to house refugees? The actual refugees (as in, not the extremists who are trying to sneak in, which I suspect are a small minority anyway) have done nothing to deserve the situation they are in, and the more well off countries should attempt to help them. However, those countries should not do so at the detriment to themselves and their people, as is happening now.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;49113865]I was looking over news coverage, and many are reporting that nobody's taken credit for it yet. The reports of screaming "Allahu ackbar" also seem to have faded away - might have been false to begin with. Islamic terrorists are certainly highest on the probability list, and the M.O. fits, but it's not impossible it was some other group entirely. Does anyone have [I]definitive[/I] evidence it was ISIS or something like that?[/QUOTE] Who else would it be? These guys had suicide bombers, explosives and a lot of weapons + ammunition. Them being Islamic just shortens the list down further to very slim picking.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;49113865]I was looking over news coverage, and many are reporting that nobody's taken credit for it yet. The reports of screaming "Allahu ackbar" also seem to have faded away - might have been false to begin with. Islamic terrorists are certainly highest on the probability list, and the M.O. fits, but it's not impossible it was some other group entirely. Does anyone have [I]definitive[/I] evidence it was ISIS or something like that?[/QUOTE] what [I]definitive[/I] evidence do you want? One of the men captured claims to be ISIS, says its an ISIS mission, they have considerable arms (automatic rifles, grenades) and it was clearly planned in advance. The most likely scenario is, yes, they are indeed ISIS or some affiliate movement thereof.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;49113865]I was looking over news coverage, and many are reporting that nobody's taken credit for it yet. The reports of screaming "Allahu ackbar" also seem to have faded away - might have been false to begin with. Islamic terrorists are certainly highest on the probability list, and the M.O. fits, but it's not impossible it was some other group entirely. Does anyone have [I]definitive[/I] evidence it was ISIS or something like that?[/QUOTE] If they arent muslim this thread is gonna be a reaaaally awkward read

ISIS 'claims responsibility' for Paris attacks after hundreds killed across French city [url]http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619363/Islamic-State-ISIS-Twitter-Paris-attacks[/url] Well, shit. This won't end well...

What makes me really sick, is that mixed in with the expected "mourn/pray for France" posts in my Facebook feed, there's a disgusting amount of posts mixed in that are along the line of "Paris suffered an awful terrorist attack... THANKS, OBAMA".

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;49113933]ISIS 'claims responsibility' for Paris attacks after hundreds killed across French city [url]http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619363/Islamic-State-ISIS-Twitter-Paris-attacks[/url] Well, shit. This won't end well...[/QUOTE] They do this every time tho

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49113935]What makes me really sick, is that mixed in with the expected "mourn/pray for France" posts in my Facebook feed, there's a disgusting amount of posts mixed in that are along the line of "Paris suffered an awful terrorist attack... THANKS, OBAMA".[/QUOTE] Sounds like an idiot cull is in order, time to clean up your FB friendslist, man [editline]14th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Duck M.;49113939]They do this every time tho[/QUOTE] True, I guess it remains unclear. :/

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;49113933]ISIS 'claims responsibility' for Paris attacks after hundreds killed across French city [url]http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619363/Islamic-State-ISIS-Twitter-Paris-attacks[/url] Well, shit. This won't end well...[/QUOTE] IIRC ISIS claimed responsibility on the Charlie Hebdo attacks when it was actually carried out by Al Qaeda. EDIT: Off-topic, but when I read the thread title, I was hoping it was going to be badage boys thread.

[QUOTE=dilzinyomouth;49113914]what [I]definitive[/I] evidence do you want? One of the men captured claims to be ISIS, says its an ISIS mission, they have considerable arms (automatic rifles, grenades) and it was clearly planned in advance. The most likely scenario is, yes, they are indeed ISIS or some affiliate movement thereof.[/QUOTE] I agree that the most likely possibility is ISIS, with the next-most-likely being al-Quaeda or an unaffiliated Islamic terrorist cell, and that all other possibilities are pretty damn low, but... People are acting like it's absolutely settled. I'm not seeing those claims you repeated in any mainstream news yet (the news doesn't dictate reality, and they get fooled quite a bit, but it's still a good check on false rumors). That's why I was asking for solid proof - because I prefer to base my decisions and opinions on evidence, not probability, whenever I can.

[QUOTE=ultra_bright;49113110]Literally everyone in my family said this is what would happen when you open the floodgates and let millions of refugees in, the terrorists get in as well.[/QUOTE] Most (if not all, not sure) Islamist terror attacks in Europe have been carried out by native citizens so far. IIrc many of them went to training camps in Syria though, but they just take a plane back legally. [editline]14th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Bradyns;49113465]I awoke to check Facebook, and one of my French friends had marked herself as safe, I thought that it was a prank after the Hebdo events earlier in the year. Jesus christ. :cry:[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure Facebook only activates that feature if something happens and only for people in the area, so it probably never is.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49113669]Whats honestly going through your head? Everyone sees the shit you post and knows how fucking retarded and backwards you are. Why do you continue to post with such a smug sense of attitude? You defend pedophiles, post regularly on gamerghazi, and shitpost on facepunch non-stop. What is wrong with you? A shitload of people are dead and you cannot stop shitposting for a few seconds? You are psychotic or some shit.[/QUOTE] Some people are just like that, so ingrained in something they see it everywhere they go and make it part of who they are. They give credence to the term "sjw."

-xniop

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;49113940]Sounds like an idiot cull is in order, time to clean up your FB friendslist, man [/QUOTE] I've thought about it, there's one in particular who keeps posting such nonsense, but this shit takes the cake. [img]http://i.imgur.com/q5eWAhn.jpg[/img] What in the god-damned Hell would drive anybody to think that this was a good response to this tragedy, never mind what-ever the fuck notions were present in the echo-chamber the creator of that image calls a skull.

[QUOTE=Incoming.;49113815]You ignored when I said "Granted, there are probably other solutions I can't conjure up, I still hold fast that destabilizing your own country is no way to do it."[/quote] I am not sure what you want me to say. If you want to propose some other solution then I'd be happy to discuss it, but so far everything that has been proposed is ultimately destabilizing. [quote]Distribution could resolve issues, yes, but [b]that is not what is happening[/b], nor does it remove all issues. Explain to me how you will distribute families? Is this on a per case basis?[/quote] I am not sure what you mean. [url=http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/eu-attempt-resolve-refugee-quota-dispute-150922044717786.html]Redistribution has been agreed[/url] and it's supposed to alleviate some of the pressure from Greece and Italy. Families obviously don't need to be separated. You just calculate how many families or idividuals a country needs to take in order to fulfill the required quota. [quote] Because that is just as expensive as patrolling the sea. [/quote] You can't seriously believe that staffing, supplying and mobilizing Frontex, local coast guards and national navies is anywhere near the cost of a simple calculation and maybe some rudimentary registration. [quote]Egypt was just a placeholder, maybe I should have stated this, considering you decided to ignore the line formerly mentioned, except for the last few words in an attempt to cherry-pick my statements.[/quote] Egypt was a placeholder of a third-party state which you suggest forcing into hosting people we don't want to. Even if you replaced Egypt with a rich state, how do you reconcile your view that the current situation is very destabilizing for the whole continent with your wish for a single country to handle it all anyway? [quote]"Forcing countries such as Lebanon and Jordan to deal with millions of refugees while we deal with a fraction of that is pretty wrong." Yes. Yes it is, but handling a mass refugee crisis as incompetently as it has been thus far is arguably worse.[/quote] Having Lebanon host 1.3 million refugees while Germany will maybe host 800.000 is not very competent, and it's very unsustainable. [quote]That's a bit biased. No doubt they would return, but not only could a stronger patrol dissuade second attempts,[/quote] I've already replied on that point. An extensive patrol in Greece alone, regardless of its impossible logistics has no hope of deterring passage accross a maritime border (~642 km from Thrace to Crete) where the closest distance between Turkish and Greek territory is less than 5 km. You can practically swim accross. And the fact is, the moment they enter (or sink) within Greece's maritime border, they are the EU's problem, unless you decide to start shooting on sight. [quote] but is it not worth it,[/quote] These people are willing to risk drowning and getting beat up by riot police just to get into Europe. Ofcourse it's going to still be worth it to them. [quote] when it is now being shown that not all of these wonderful refugees abiding by national laws? [/quote] There was never any question that some refugees don't abide by national laws. That's inherent to any group of people. [quote] This would make it easier to give humanitarian aid to those that need it. A nightclub had to bar refugees due to some of their behavior.[/quote] If I remember correctly, a nightclub barred all refugees because of the actions of some refugees. The nightclub are neither paragons of virtue, nor do refugees deserve to not be given humanitarian aid on the grounds of being sexist. [quote]There's two major routes being used, one of which is on land. That said, land is much easier to patrol than sea.[/quote] Unless you are referring to the Greco-Turkish land border, then no, they are not. They get through Greece, Italy and Spain by boat and then make their way up north. [quote]It's silly to assume that you could stop all "poor excuses" for boats won't still get by, but is it not better to intervene? [/quote] To be frank, I don't think that you will stop a single boat with maritime patrol, unless Turkey seriously co-operates. So far, this has not been the case. There's been footage of the Turkish coast guard escorting the boats past their border. Once the boats are past the Turkish border, you can literally not stop them. Let's assume that there's going to be joint patrols, [i]within[/i] the Turkish border, or in a way that has any detained boats return to Turkey. You'll manage to detain a few boats, while others pass the border unhindered. What happens next? Well, Turkey still has to deal with 2 million refugees, they still can't regulate the migrant inflow properly (just like the current situation), more asylum seekers walk to the coast and hitch a ride to Kos or Lebsos. [QUOTE]It's already been shown that a high number of these refugees are not as desperate as they would leave you to believe.[/QUOTE] And if you check my original post, I don't contest that. I am arguing that you can't seriously enforce any set of criteria without their co-operation. And considering that the non-refugees are economic immigrants, they have no reason not to tear up their documentation.

Hopefully MaxOfS2D was part of the casualties. [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Alt of Terragen" - postal))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=trjr1123;49114014]Hopefully MaxOfS2D was part of the casualties.[/QUOTE] Quality post.

[QUOTE=trjr1123;49114014]Hopefully MaxOfS2D was part of the casualties.[/QUOTE] Don't do that.