French Terror Attacks, scores dead

[GrandizerII]

That doesn't mean Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Bremmer, Hilary, and erdogan wasn't necessary for ISIS either.  They each either actively promoted ISIS, or made blunders that predictably made something like ISIS far more likely.

It's of course the cynical approach, but what isn't cynical under these circumstances. Without the removal of Saddam, the help in removing Gaddaffi and the weakening of Assad, there would be no ISIS, period. They were lids on the boiling kettles.

Analysis oversimplified. ISIS might have emerged regardless. All it often takes is perception of oppression (and over years and decades) to produce and fuel something like ISIS. Anyway, seems more like ISIS is an extension of prior terrorist groups, but with better technology use than before.

As for the names you mentioned, I don't see them any better than ISIS ...

This goes for Erdogan and the American leaders as well.

[abaris]

Analysis oversimplified. ISIS might have emerged regardless. All it often takes is perception of oppression (and over years and decades) to produce and fuel something like ISIS. Anyway, seems more like ISIS is an extension of prior terrorist groups, but with better technology use than before.

As for the names you mentioned, I don't see them any better than ISIS ...

This goes for Erdogan and the American leaders as well.

It's a well known fact that former Iraqi officers are training and commanding ISIS. Not because there's so much love lost between the two groups, but because of sharing the same hatred. So, no unemployed officers, no trained ISIS forces. Even if they emerged anyway, they would have stood on opposing sides of the trenches. And I guess, the republican guards would have made short work of them. Even more so, since the American equipment the new Iraqi army simply threw away when fleeing, wouldn't have landed in the hands of insurgents.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Merkel is a commie.  She's using the situation as a means to wreck Germany in the belief that it will lead to a resurgence of communism.

You are a desperately deluded individual, on multiple levels.

It's obvious that she fooled you.  She's always been a commie and will be till the day she croaks.  

http://deathofcommunism.weebly.com/merke...ldier.html

https://www.knightstemplarinternational....-refugees/

[Gormo]

Well, the bet that Merkel and her economists are making is that the immigrants will grow the economy by virtue of them working and paying those taxes.  Germany, more than most, can afford it.  Will it pan out the way they planned, probably not exactly.  Will it precipitate a "socioeconomic collapse within Europe?"  I strongly doubt it.

I really don't think this kind of growth, roughly 1% per year in places like Germany, is sustainable. Thousands could come every single day without reprieve for many years, how can one keep pace with their needs in the long run, for example the demand for places to live?  At the moment only short term (therefore inadequate) solutions seem to exist.

You're probably right, a catastrophe of that magnitude is unlikely, but only because I feel the EU will break up beforehand if things continue this way. The Netherlands has been considering this for some time now, and there was a report today that the UK is also considering this.

I also feel part of the problem is that people tend to avoid discussing this honestly, as people who raise objections tend to get labelled as xenophobic. In general, people seem to be reluctant to talk about this in a practical sense. In truth this problem goes far beyond Syria, and has been ongoing for many years now. At the moment Syrians only constitute a minority of the people trying to get into Europe. This means that even if the situation in Syria is somehow resolved and everyone goes home, it only solves part of the problem.

They don't have the means to process all of these people, as they don't have identification. There is no way to know their origins, and there is no way to know who has extremist tendencies, or who could prove to be otherwise problematic.

[A Raggedly Bohemian Radical]

It's of course the cynical approach, but what isn't cynical under these circumstances. Without the removal of Saddam, the help in removing Gaddaffi and the weakening of Assad, there would be no ISIS, period. They were lids on the boiling kettles.

Analysis oversimplified. ISIS might have emerged regardless. All it often takes is perception of oppression (and over years and decades) to produce and fuel something like ISIS. Anyway, seems more like ISIS is an extension of prior terrorist groups, but with better technology use than before.

As for the names you mentioned, I don't see them any better than ISIS ...

This goes for Erdogan and the American leaders as well.

ISIS are just another continuation of this type of barbarism. al-Qaeda has the same agenda, an International Islamic Caliphate. Instead of Iraq with ISIS, al-Qaeda's terror began in Kashmir

[abaris]

ISIS are just another continuation of this type of barbarism. al-Qaeda has the same agenda, an International Islamic Caliphate. Instead of Iraq with ISIS, al-Qaeda's terror began in Kashmir

Well, maybe there's a reason why both groups hate each other and Al Quaeda openly declared war on ISIS? Just a hint to look a little bit deeper. Something, most people never do. Speaking of oversimplifying the matter.

[A Raggedly Bohemian Radical]

ISIS are just another continuation of this type of barbarism. al-Qaeda has the same agenda, an International Islamic Caliphate. Instead of Iraq with ISIS, al-Qaeda's terror began in Kashmir

Well, maybe there's a reason why both groups hate each other and Al Quaeda openly declared war on ISIS? Just a hint to look a little bit deeper. Something, most people never do. Speaking of oversimplifying the matter.

Know that both mutually hate one another, but both mutually want the destruction of Western Civilisation: the only thing that matters. I looked a bit deeper for you already:

https://t.co/huYxMAWlOM


Kind regards.