Downthread I reckoned this set of attacks would take less than a dozen shooters and a few dumbos willing to just pull a cord.
Rumours are that the number involved is about a dozen.
If that is so, there are people missing.
Well they have accounted for 4 perhaps 5. 2 killed in the theatre ( BBC says 3?) and 2 dumbos with strings at the stadium. That's leaves at least half missing .......
''The french went on a huge march post Charlie Hebdo. Didnt help them tonight.''
Perhaps that is because their leaders ignored them.
For me, these are crocodile tears from our leaders. This is the system they believe in, and were taught to believe in by those who preceded them. Tonight is its product.
It is the utter failure of their policy of the last 30 years that is shaking them. Not the dreadful deaths in Paris. Shame on them.
The whole Je Suis Charlie thing was understandable but was a mistake because it made the us-and-them situation in Paris even worse.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
No military expert but surely there's at least one other question:
how many are we going to need for our own territory?
I'm pretty sure the US doesn't need 1,000,000+ soldiers to protect their own territory, for instance.
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Downthread I reckoned this set of attacks would take less than a dozen shooters and a few dumbos willing to just pull a cord.
Rumours are that the number involved is about a dozen.
If that is so, there are people missing.
Well they have accounted for 4 perhaps 5. 2 killed in the theatre ( BBC says 3?) and 2 dumbos with strings at the stadium. That's leaves at least half missing .......
I would presume the authorities are worried they will come back for more. That is what happened with the cell that first attacked people on the same day as the other shot Charlie Hebdo staff, then came back the next day and took the hostages in the supermarket.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
Yeah, these are difficult questions. The alternative would be to let the wound fester, and it could get a whole lot worse. I think a problem with Iraq/Afghanistan is we weren't committed for the long run.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
You change your mind about removing Saddam. It anyway never was about regime change was it?
The French authorities were aware that the theatre might be targeted at some point.
If that is so then that really is absolutely massive and puts Hollande on the spot as well as his government. They could not possibly survive such a revelation.
I don't know. We know in the UK that for instance a number of high profile shopping centres and football stadiums have been in the plans of Islamic terrorists over the past few years. The list of possible targets will be absolutely enormous.
I wouldn't call for Cameron to go if god forbid terrorists did manage to realize their plans.
Well yes I could agree with that. This though was very specific, a small venue not an obvious one like a shopping centre. If they knew it was likely to be a target they knew more. It's going to be difficult to explain.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
Yeah, these are difficult questions. The alternative would be to let the wound fester, and it could get a whole lot worse. I think a problem with Iraq/Afghanistan is we weren't committed for the long run.
Yup yup - not addressing "Then what?" comes back to bite you every time.
The French authorities were aware that the theatre might be targeted at some point.
If that is so then that really is absolutely massive and puts Hollande on the spot as well as his government. They could not possibly survive such a revelation.
I don't know. We know in the UK that for instance a number of high profile shopping centres and football stadiums have been in the plans of Islamic terrorists over the past few years. The list of possible targets will be absolutely enormous.
I wouldn't call for Cameron to go if god forbid terrorists did manage to realize their plans.
Well yes I could agree with that. This though was very specific, a small venue not an obvious one like a shopping centre. If they knew it was likely to be a target they knew more. It's going to be difficult to explain.
Unfortunately, I think the list of potential targets identified from chatter etc, both big and small, is probably very very long. Obviously, it is a slightly different kettle of fish if they got a very specific warning, but we don't know that.
Just seeing the pictures at the Stad France, it seems that probably a very lucky escape there. There are saying they blew themselves up at gate. If they had got in or let them off when the match started / ended, obviously things would have been much worse. I am presuming their plan wasn't to blow themselves up 15 minutes into the game from outside.
Downthread I reckoned this set of attacks would take less than a dozen shooters and a few dumbos willing to just pull a cord.
Rumours are that the number involved is about a dozen.
If that is so, there are people missing.
Well they have accounted for 4 perhaps 5. 2 killed in the theatre ( BBC says 3?) and 2 dumbos with strings at the stadium. That's leaves at least half missing .......
I would presume the authorities are worried they will come back for more. That is what happened with the cell that first attacked people on the same day as the other shot Charlie Hebdo staff, then came back the next day and took the hostages in the supermarket.
Indeed. Didn't they also attack in another town or city as well? Got to be a complete nightmare for the authorities.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
Yeah, these are difficult questions. The alternative would be to let the wound fester, and it could get a whole lot worse. I think a problem with Iraq/Afghanistan is we weren't committed for the long run.
Yup yup - not addressing "Then what?" comes back to bite you every time.
Yeah, and events back home often take precedence, and may lead to early withdrawals.
Downthread I reckoned this set of attacks would take less than a dozen shooters and a few dumbos willing to just pull a cord.
Rumours are that the number involved is about a dozen.
If that is so, there are people missing.
Well they have accounted for 4 perhaps 5. 2 killed in the theatre ( BBC says 3?) and 2 dumbos with strings at the stadium. That's leaves at least half missing .......
2 from the theatre may be the drive by shooters from the retaurant, they are in close proximity.
Can someone explain why these people keep attacking France? Why not Germany, Italy or Britain?
High Muslim population with established and strong networks to North Africa and Middle East and France are bombing ISIS in Syria and Iraq.
The security expert on the radio suggested Britain are high target, but it seems the networks aren't as strong as in France, but it seems that intell has been saying for a long time that trying to get something going.
Germany less so because they aren't involved in bombing etc.
There's nothing to say that Western democracy will inevitably triumph worldwide, nor that what we have at the moment is permanent either.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm experiencing the equivalent of the Fall of Rome - of the modern age - in slow motion.
Oh for goodness sake, not even most Muslims want ISIS even if they do live in often less than democratic nations
At times like these I look at the world leaders we have (and their likely replacements) and it seems a lot bleaker. Far too many weak weak leaders. Obama, Holland, Cameron, none of men for making really tough decisions. Their likely replacements are no better.
This is huge if true. So huge it goes beyond comprehension.
Hopefully it kicks us into action in Syria. Maybe with this and the airliner bomb, there can be a coordinated international approach (UK, US, EU, Russia)?
How would bombing Syria have prevented this attack?
I'm talking boots on the ground to take out ISIS entirely.
You would require full deployment of much of the armed forces of the US and Russians and would result in many thousands of allied deaths, if it all went well. If it went badly???
And what do you do afterwards?
A heavy price, but to get rid of ISIS it may be worth it. A good question about afterwards. UN mandates don't have a particularly good track record.
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there? 2) what does victory look like? 3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
Yeah, these are difficult questions. The alternative would be to let the wound fester, and it could get a whole lot worse. I think a problem with Iraq/Afghanistan is we weren't committed for the long run.
Yup yup - not addressing "Then what?" comes back to bite you every time.
Yeah, and events back home often take precedence, and may lead to early withdrawals.
substantial penalty for early withdrawal - just ask Monica Lewinsky
The French authorities were aware that the theatre might be targeted at some point.
If that is so then that really is absolutely massive and puts Hollande on the spot as well as his government. They could not possibly survive such a revelation.
I don't know. We know in the UK that for instance a number of high profile shopping centres and football stadiums have been in the plans of Islamic terrorists over the past few years. The list of possible targets will be absolutely enormous.
I wouldn't call for Cameron to go if god forbid terrorists did manage to realize their plans.
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
Except that wouldn't be true, roundly criticized by most of the cyber-security profession would be closer to the truth. It's bunk, any medium skilled programmer, with off the shelf free tools could produce a WhatsApp equivalent secure communications platform in a couple of weeks, that horse bolted a long time ago, closing the door now just intrudes on people's privacy with no actual increase in intelligence.
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
Except that wouldn't be true, roundly criticized by most of the cyber-security profession would be closer to the truth. It's bunk, any medium skilled programmer, with off the shelf free tools could produce a WhatsApp equivalent secure communications platform in a couple of weeks, that horse bolted a long time ago, closing the door now just intrudes on people's privacy with no actual increase in intelligence.
The French authorities were aware that the theatre might be targeted at some point.
You mean theatre in general I assume, not this particular theatre.
No, that one.
You're kidding. If that's true Hollande and his government really could be finished in a matter of days or weeks. WTF.
Not quite as simple as that. The theatre was subject to generalised threats from certain quarters in the past. You couldn't sit outside it 24/7, however. I'm sure that more will emerge in time.
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
Except that wouldn't be true, roundly criticized by most of the cyber-security profession would be closer to the truth. It's bunk, any medium skilled programmer, with off the shelf free tools could produce a WhatsApp equivalent secure communications platform in a couple of weeks, that horse bolted a long time ago, closing the door now just intrudes on people's privacy with no actual increase in intelligence.
It's curious that those here who are arguing for the most draconian response to these terrible events seem to be the very same people who have laid into me in the recent past for defending the government in its efforts to take reasonable steps to reduce the risks of such terrible events happening here.
Anyway, time for bed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
The draft Communications Data Bill ("snoopers' charter") proposed by the British government under Prime Minister David Cameron and Home Secretary Theresa May has been criticized as security theater.[32] Similarly, Cameron's proposal to ban encryption in the UK has been criticized as ineffective security theater.[33]
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
Except that wouldn't be true, roundly criticized by most of the cyber-security profession would be closer to the truth. It's bunk, any medium skilled programmer, with off the shelf free tools could produce a WhatsApp equivalent secure communications platform in a couple of weeks, that horse bolted a long time ago, closing the door now just intrudes on people's privacy with no actual increase in intelligence.
Moderate Moslems have a problem but they have to own it not blame it largely on infidels.
You assume that there is such a thing as moderate Islam. There is not. There are people who are adherents to Islam and all are extreme and people who lack strong adherence who are not extreme. It is your level of belief in Islam that leads to the extremes of thought and action.
@Paris: Dès demain, fermeture de tous les équipements de la Ville: écoles, musées, bibliothèques, gymnases, piscines, marchés alimentaires
Absolutely the wrong decision.
Not surprising but utterly wrong.
We don't know what other intelligence the authorities may have. Remember that after the Charlie Hebdo murders there were further terror attacks in succeeding days.
@Paris: Dès demain, fermeture de tous les équipements de la Ville: écoles, musées, bibliothèques, gymnases, piscines, marchés alimentaires
Absolutely the wrong decision.
Not surprising but utterly wrong.
We don't know what other intelligence the authorities may have. Remember that after the Charlie Hebdo murders there were further terror attacks in succeeding days.
The purpose of terrorism is to create fear and change in the target community. While there are undoubted dangers in trying to "continue as before" this is by far the best (possibly only valid) response to any terror attack.
'The jury heard he had fraudulently secured a place at university and then used student funding to pay for the group's flights.'
A story that matches terrorism (or would-be terrorism) with the state's unintended largesse.
There's another issue here: there have been stories that jailed radicals in our prisons have been recruiting from the rest of the prison population. If true, that needs stamping on quickly.
The problem for the West is that they are attempting to implement a system of Human Rights outside of the necessary safeguard of the Social Contract.
The idea that everyone has rights and those rights are inalienable but that there is no consequent obligation on those who benefit from such protection and freedoms is not sustainable and is probably not even coherent logically.
The problem for the West is that they are attempting to implement a system of Human Rights outside of the necessary safeguard of the Social Contract.
The idea that everyone has rights and those rights are inalienable but that there is no consequent obligation on those who benefit from such protection and freedoms is not sustainable and is probably not even coherent logically.
“I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone.” ― H.L. Mencken
The French authorities were aware that the theatre might be targeted at some point.
You mean theatre in general I assume, not this particular theatre.
No, that one.
You're kidding. If that's true Hollande and his government really could be finished in a matter of days or weeks. WTF.
Not quite as simple as that. The theatre was subject to generalised threats from certain quarters in the past. You couldn't sit outside it 24/7, however. I'm sure that more will emerge in time.
But some form of screening of audiences and employees upon entry is feasible. You can't go to a major concert in the US without having your bags screened. Why not in Paris?
Open borders, freedom of movement, ever closer union, multiculturalism; all the things we've had rammed down our throats for years. Most people will be devastated but not surprised at what we're seeing in Paris, the end result of appeasement and naivety of ineffective politicians. I saw the news in the week young men at a hostel in Thornton Heath, openly boasting that they were pretending to be Syrian. Heaven knows who is lurking amongst us.
Kieran Pedley, whoever he is, says this is not a time for politics. Well it's the time to face the facts if you've been wringing your hands and calling people racist for years. Im looking forward to the bland, head on one side apologists saying that lessons must be learned.
I'm horrified at the loss of life in Paris, it's too awful to contemplate, politicians are as much to blame as the gun toting madmen.
Changing the subject I've yet to see any evidence that Sterling is worth £50m. He reminds me of Aaron Lennon, great pace and the ability to beat people but not a very good footballer.
Comments
Anyway, time for bed.
@Paris: Dès demain, fermeture de tous les équipements de la Ville: écoles, musées, bibliothèques, gymnases, piscines, marchés alimentaires
Just seeing the pictures at the Stad France, it seems that probably a very lucky escape there. There are saying they blew themselves up at gate. If they had got in or let them off when the match started / ended, obviously things would have been much worse. I am presuming their plan wasn't to blow themselves up 15 minutes into the game from outside.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11994992/jihadi-john-mohammed-emwazi-dead-syria-latest-news.html
Welcome to soft touch Britain.
Especially if the alternative were Corbyn.......
Security theater is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it
I wish it would say "criticized by this one writer".
Except that wouldn't be true, roundly criticized by most of the cyber-security profession would be closer to the truth. It's bunk, any medium skilled programmer, with off the shelf free tools could produce a WhatsApp equivalent secure communications platform in a couple of weeks, that horse bolted a long time ago, closing the door now just intrudes on people's privacy with no actual increase in intelligence.
Then they should add more references
We have to put boots on the ground to take them out.
As I said earlier -
If you are going to put large numbers of boots on the ground, you need to answer 3 questions up front -
1) why are we there?
2) what does victory look like?
3) how do we know when we've got there?
then there's the killer question -
Then what?
It's the question that was never asked in Iraq - so you remove Saddam Hussein: then what?
If you are going to put troops in harm's way, you have to answer all the questions first.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/01/david_camerons_.html
http://boingboing.net/2015/01/13/what-david-cameron-just-propos.html
https://medium.com/message/dear-prime-minister-cameron-20th-century-solutions-wont-help-21st-century-surveillance-ff2d7a3d300c
http://www.businessinsider.com/david-cameron-encryption-back-doors-iphone-whatsapp-2015-7
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/13/david-cameron-encrypted-messaging-apps-ban
Will give you a flavor. Oh and...
https://github.com/WhisperSystems
http://boingboing.net/2015/01/13/what-david-cameron-just-propos.html
https://medium.com/message/dear-prime-minister-cameron-20th-century-solutions-wont-help-21st-century-surveillance-ff2d7a3d300c
http://www.businessinsider.com/david-cameron-encryption-back-doors-iphone-whatsapp-2015-7
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/13/david-cameron-encrypted-messaging-apps-ban
Will give you a flavor. Oh and...
https://github.com/WhisperSystems
Thanks. I didn't believe that there was only one person of that opinion.
You assume that there is such a thing as moderate Islam. There is not. There are people who are adherents to Islam and all are extreme and people who lack strong adherence who are not extreme. It is your level of belief in Islam that leads to the extremes of thought and action.
Not surprising but utterly wrong.
As an aside, the following story is also on the BBC News frontpage:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34814735
'The jury heard he had fraudulently secured a place at university and then used student funding to pay for the group's flights.'
A story that matches terrorism (or would-be terrorism) with the state's unintended largesse.
There's another issue here: there have been stories that jailed radicals in our prisons have been recruiting from the rest of the prison population. If true, that needs stamping on quickly.
The idea that everyone has rights and those rights are inalienable but that there is no consequent obligation on those who benefit from such protection and freedoms is not sustainable and is probably not even coherent logically.
Or a desperate, common sense defence against the seemingly undefendable.
Kieran Pedley, whoever he is, says this is not a time for politics. Well it's the time to face the facts if you've been wringing your hands and calling people racist for years. Im looking forward to the bland, head on one side apologists saying that lessons must be learned.
I'm horrified at the loss of life in Paris, it's too awful to contemplate, politicians are as much to blame as the gun toting madmen.
Corbyn's embarassing Meida Chief, Seumus Milne on Isis.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq …