Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

The war on terror has been going on for 15 years now - are there more terrorists in 2000 or 2015?

Sooner or later, we will have to come to the realization that terrorism cannot be eliminated by force. Stop destabilizing Arab countries, stop imperial interference in Northern Africa, and perhaps we'll see an end to this nonsense.

I agree with you. Unfortunately these attacks tend to strengthen the resolve of the people who want to reshape the middle East.

The other complicating factor is that not-intervening will mean sitting on our hands while civilian populations get badly treated by their governments.

What to do? what to do? I don't know the answer.

I'm curious, under what logic would this stop or get any better if we allow the cancer to grow?

By the same logic that a wound heals when you stop poking the scab.

If there's any lesson from the past 15 years, it is this: state engineering does not work. Period. You cannot control it. You don't "allow" anything. You cannot stop anything. The forces are beyond your control.

Americans and Europeans have to step out of the colonial mindset of trying to control the world. Then we'll have peace.

War on Terror is causing the cancer.

So just give up and offer your good will???

To be clear, "giving up" here means stop screwing with other countries. Yes, that's an outstanding strategy. While you're at it, also stop supporting terrorist regimes like Saudi Arabia.

Yes. Treat terror attacks as any other act of organized crime. It's stupid to do otherwise, given that the very point of terrorism is to make you do anything else.

Do you think tonight's actions were solely about economics and politicalstatus? Could they, and the January attacks, have also have been attributed to a specific reading of the Qur'an?

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions." - Karl Marx

Interpretations of the Quran can be a channel for rage, but they are not the cause of it. If they were, we'd have Moroccan terrorists and Malaysian terrorists and Turkish terrorists, all of which we don't have. We have Arab/Pashtun terrorists, mainly from countries where the West interferes. Is that a coincidence?

> stop supporting terrorist regimes like Saudi Arabia.

In your earlier comment you wrote:

> Stop destabilizing Arab countries

Isn't supporting the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia pretty much supporting stability? How can you stop supporting a dictator without a big risk of causing destabilization (as happened in Libya)?

Seems like you want two logical opposities simultaneously?

Or it means that the US has a double-standard approach where it stabilizes favorable dictatorships (Saudi, Qatar, Kuwait) and destabilizes unfavorable dictatorships (Libya, Iraq) and democracies (Egypt 60s, Iran 50s).

How about getting out of other people's countries?

It's a bit more complex than that. We've reached the point where the Islamic State is a nation-state, which is at war with a number of other states (including France). In this context, how do you differentiate "terrorism" and "act of war"/"black ops action"?

I agree that an overreaction is likely, though considering how crazy the latest security law are, I don't see how much worse it can get in this regard.

> We've reached the point where the Islamic State is a nation-state, which is at war with a number of other states (including France).

Ok. So if it indeed can be attributed to them, or if they go out and admit, then fine, send in the tanks - the Paris attack would be an act of war.

> considering how crazy the latest security law are, I don't see how much worse it can get in this regard.

Oh it can. We have a long way to go from what we have now to what was in USSR or Nazi Germany. I just hope we don't decide to run the distance.

What worries me more is that the overrection will be aimed at immigrants and minorities who live in Europe. There already are reports of this beginning to happen.

> Ok. So if it indeed can be attributed to them, or if they go out and admit, then fine, send in the tanks - the Paris attack would be an act of war.

They claimed responsibility. As for sending in the tanks, I don't see that happening.

> Oh it can. We have a long way to go from what we have now to what was in USSR or Nazi Germany. I just hope we don't decide to run the distance.

Yeah, but neither were democracies. The Red Scare-era US would be a better example. I really hope it doesn't go this way.

> What worries me more is that the overrection will be aimed at immigrants and minorities who live in Europe. There already are reports of this beginning to happen.

Probably not from the government, but who knows what the population will do?

Then we'll hopefully have peace, perhaps.

> By the same logic that a wound heals when you stop poking the scab.

Except that our governments see themselves as providing first aid to an infected wound. Infected wounds only get worse without treatment.

> If there's any lesson from the past 15 years, it is this: state engineering does not work. Period.

Their intention was (probably) good, execution on the other hand was less then stellar.

> You cannot control it. You don't "allow" anything. You cannot stop anything. The forces are beyond your control.

1940's France would beg to disagree. The Allies in WW2 clearly stopped the Axis powers and controlled their aggression.

> Americans and Europeans have to step out of the colonial mindset of trying to control the world.

Agreed.