They = Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, the main suspects in the Charlie Hebdo massacre, who are now surrounded by police and in communication with them. The police are speaking in terms of negotiation and surrender. There is at least one hostage. How do you negotiate or try to capture the Kouachis alive when they have told you clearly that their mission requires them to go until they attain the end they call martyrdom? It would be good to deny them that satisfaction, and I hope the French police have some techniques that make it more likely that the hostage(s) will survive.
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men? In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre. We're told French President François Hollande looked "tense" as he conceded that "France is... shocked... that the perpetrators of these acts have not yet been arrested, and I am speaking before you as operations are ongoing."
***
I think "massacre" is the right word here, not "mass murder." It should be recognized as a military operation — France is under attack — not some individuals who lost their mind or their temper and transgressed into the everyday evil we call murder.
পোস্টগুলি
১৩২টি মন্তব্য:
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men? In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
Because no matter where you are, the police are minutes away when seconds count!
How do you negotiate or try to capture the Kouachis alive...
I'd not be so concerned about the capturing alive part, but tell them "If you release the hostage, we'll promise not to smear your bodies with pig blood."
the French Police, at least those on scene as they came out of the building, had no guns.
How could they have stopped them?
John Henry
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men?
I think you have to decide what you want. If you want to deny them the chance to be martyrs, you obviously can't go in with guns blazing.
In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
This also seems unrealistic. They were in and out in a few minutes, and killed the immediate responders.
If anything, I'd expect an attack in the US to be more successful. Every time I've been to France I can't help but notice lots and lots of gendarmes standing around with machine guns. Compared to what the average US cop has at his immediate disposal, the French police were probably comparatively well equipped.
Three French bicycle police officers arrived as the shooting was still going on. They retreated when they heard the sound of automatic gunfire, as not a single one of these officers was armed with a gun. If this had been the US, all three would have been armed, and would have been trained to actively engage the shooters. Three bicycle cops with handguns aren't a good match for two terrorists with AK-47's, but by engaging they would perhaps have given time for more heavily armed police to respond. I will never understand the appeal of police who don't carry firearms.
Off topic but Ann, what is the point of the prove you're not a robot captcha?
As several of us have pointed out, it serves no purpose and can be totally ignored when posting.
So why have it at all?
John Henry
It does kind of resemble the North L.A. shoot-out, except those guys could not claim to have been traumatized from seeing pictures of the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Amichel mentions that the unarmed police retreated at the sound of gunfire.
I have heard comments, not here, that this was cowardice. French surrender monkeys and so on.
I assume that they retreated only to safety but close enough to keep an eye on what was going on and report back to HQ.
I certainly think they made the right moves.
John Henry
“The absolute rejection of Islamic fundamentalism must be proclaimed loudly and clearly.”
I'm waiting to see how Le Pen fares in the next election, especially since Hollande is "the most unpopular president in modern history."
The secret is firepower. The Muslims teach that while Obama says all must be disarmed: the nation, the individuals and especially the white men.
But that makes perfect sense. He is one of them.
@ HAGAR
Wasn't the North Hollywood Shootout precipitated by two people trying to rob a bank? They weren't motivated by politics or religion to massacre civilians. They were just trying to escape capture.
Save the hostages for sure, but allowing them to be martyrs if the 1er RPIMa or CRS snipers have a clean shot, taking it would not hurt my feelings...
Their parents must be charming people.
Every time I've been to France I can't help but notice lots and lots of gendarmes standing around with machine guns. Compared to what the average US cop has at his immediate disposal, the French police were probably comparatively well equipped.
pairs of CRS Officers, at least one with a SMG and the other with whatever the Frogs call a 'German Shepard' :)
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men? In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
I don't know about that. The cop in LA/Big Bear kept the police throughout the State of California searching for days.
At least the French police haven't shot up any neighborhoods or newspaper delivery ladies while in pursuit.
Imagine being the person watching the Charlie Hebdo story in the news, then all of a sudden you are a part of it.
"So why have it at all?"
Because I haven't figured out a way to get rid of it. It's not an option I chose.
"Paris was a place you could hide away/If you felt you didn't fit in/French police wouldn't give me no peace/They claimed I was a nasty person."
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men? In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
France and especially Paris is heavily surveilled by cameras and the police authorities have the access. I suspect that the whole crime and the chase was "watched" on video and a series of traffic cams showed the progress of the escape. This probably explains how they were located -- they were followed. These are not my ideas, but rather those of a Parisian expat.
"Imagine being the person watching the Charlie Hebdo story in the news, then all of a sudden you are a part of it."
I thought everyone was saying "Je suis Charlie Hebdo." Doesn't that mean they were all imagining it?
It should be recognized as a military operation — France is under attack — not some individuals who lost their mind or their temper and transgressed into the everyday evil we call murder.
You are correct. These are not only what radical Islamist special forces look like, these are radical Islamist special forces.
Perhaps this event will help bend the U. S.'s grasp of terrorism back toward the military from the legal.
Their parents must be charming people.
The brothers were orphaned at an early age and raised in an orphanage.
You don't need that kind of firepower to rob a bank, Amichel.
Not condoning this, but the Siviets would have captured them and their loved ones, and made them watch their loved ones being brutally murdered before torturing them to death, sending the message that if you want to be a martyr you're taking your family with you. Crueler, but more effective than just bulldozing their home.
In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
In America the police are armed and shoot back.
Re: "France is under attack"
We are ALL under attack.
My understanding is that the unarmed bicycle police were not police-police, they were parking enforcement officers. What we used to call meter-maids. I may be mistaken about that. But, if it is so, then retreat in the face of Kalishnikov fire would seem reasonable and prudent.
"Perhaps this event will help bend the U. S.'s grasp of terrorism back toward the military from the legal."
The US's? Most of us already are there. Those that aren't will likely never be.
"Because no matter where you are, the police are minutes away when seconds count!"
-- Ironically, it wasn't the case here. The police just were outgunned, sort of like that California bank robbery story from... was it the 80s? 90s?
@HAGAR
"Moore, then a watch commander in LAPD's Wilshire Division, was one of the hundreds of officers summoned from throughout the city to the call of "Shots fired, bank robbery in progress" on Feb. 28, 1997.
When law enforcement descended on the scene, the heist-gone-bad turned into 44 minutes of gunfire as the robbers sprayed some 1,100 armor-piercing bullets at officers and nearby homes. More than 300 sworn personnel returned fire with 750 rounds -- all while news helicopters circled above, broadcasting the North Hollywood shootout for the nation to see."
http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20120227/north-hollywood-shootout-15-years-later
It should be recognized as a military operation — France is under attack
It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Iraq war.
Apparently hostage taking in Paris related to the 2 Charlie Hebo suspects:
LIVE: Hostage crisis in Paris kosher grocery store, 2 killed
This would all be taken care of quickly if the Avengers just got off their asses. Or Superman, Batman, whatever.
I am Laslo.
Perhaps this event will help bend the U. S.'s grasp of terrorism back toward the military from the legal.
The majority of Americans, I think, have always grasped that terrorism is a military issue and not a criminal one. It is Obama and ilk that sought and seek to make terrorists a criminal matter.
Remember "workplace violence" when an Islamist shot up a military base?
"In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building..."
@ LCB - That was an inane remark. Police response times are generally a function of geographic distance and staffing.
In an U. S. urban environment (like Paris), they would not have escaped, although the capture would undoubtedly been costly. In a less policed area, they may have eluded capture for a time.
Has this changed the narrative of demilitarizing the police? Why do the police need all that crap anyway? Balko wants to know.
The Bergdahl parents should weigh in on this situation.
"It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Iraq war."
-- Considering at least one of them was trained by foreign agents in warfare, another was released from Guatanimo Bay, if I recall correctly, after having taken overt hostile actions against Coalition Forces ... no. Acknowledging that men trained by state or state-like entities in warfare are conducting attacks on nations or groups that actors have declared war on is a military action is not "melodrama." It's "understanding what's going on."
It would be good to deny them that satisfaction, and I hope the French police have some techniques that make it more likely that the hostage(s) will survive.
I'm unsure of the logic of that.
It may also be the fervent wish of convicted criminals on death row to remain alive and in jail and to proclaim their innocence. Should we deny them this wish as well? Be consistent. Otherwise you may just be copping to a "no death penalty" grandstand.
Also, apparently, the car jacked driver is saying the reason for the shootings were in revenge for the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, not because the pictures hurt their feelings -- though the pictures may have given them a reason to choose that target, it looks like any soft target would have done.
But, of course, let's not acknowledge this is an act of war.
It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Iraq war.
ARM, sucking his thumb, slobber dribbling on his chin, mindlessly repeats "Bush, Bush, Bush!" as his intellect vainly seeks some purchase.
Matthew Sablan said...
another was released from Guatanimo Bay, if I recall correctly, after having taken overt hostile actions against Coalition Forces
Another example of hysteria is just making shit up to fan the flames of even more hysteria.
"'It should be recognized as a military operation — France is under attack' It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Iraq war."
I think I know that you did not click on my link on "France is under attack."
I certainly see the sequence that may lie ahead if you recognize what is happening as a military invasion and not a mere mass murder. That was my point.
All you have added is your opinion that that sequence is a "ridiculous melodrama." That is, I assume, that you prefer the crime template.
The aversion to war is strong, but not endless, unless you are a complete pacifist. The question is at what point do you recognize the condition to be war?
Dragging in Iraq is confusing, because that war wasn't justified as the war on terrorism, but weapons of mass destruction and the recalcitrance of Saddam Hussein.
So please remove that distraction. Fix your assertion and say: "It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Afghanistan war."
Now, explain why you think that was ridiculous melodrama.
I think Andrew Card got it right (at the point when the plane hit the second WTC tower): America was under attack. It was a military situation, and we needed to step up and fight.
You think that was "ridiculous melodrama," right?
By the way, if you do, do you respect the calm contemplation that George W. Bush proceeded to go through in the ensuing 5 minutes, or do you think he should have hopped up immediately? Because wouldn't that have been "ridiculous melodrama"?
Take them alive and torture them.
Show the videos all over the Middle East with the message "We are done playing around".
If they behead another captive, do the same. Repeatedly. Amp it up over and over.
Being nice certainly isn't working. Time for some good old fashioned fear of us to be used.
"AReasonableMan said...
It should be recognized as a military operation — France is under attack
It is this ridiculous melodrama mindset that led us into the Iraq war."
This is the mindset that allowed the events that led us into the Iraq war happen.
"Another example of hysteria is just making shit up to fan the flames of even more hysteria."
The only mistake I made is that they had taken hostile actions and were released from Guatanimo; instead, they were caught before they could kill people and released. So, I had a mistake, which doesn't negate the point.
Ann Althouse said...
You think that was "ridiculous melodrama," right?
Yes I do. And Cheney hiding out in an 'undisclosed location' was the perfect example of this. Panicky cowards who led this country astray at a time when level headed leadership was needed.
Andrew Card got it right
No, I think Andrew Card was grandstanding for history, giving a cryptic statement that could not be understood without further context, "One small step for man" style, instead of the plain facts to the Commander in Chief.
Well, he is off of Bush and on to Cheney. I guess this is his defense from the charge of monomania.
‘It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I’d rather die standing than live on my knees.’
- Mr Charbonnier
words worth remembrance
Matthew Sablan said...
The only mistake I made is that they had taken hostile actions and were released from Guatanimo; instead, they were caught before they could kill people and released. So, I had a mistake, which doesn't negate the point.
So, everything you said was factually inaccurate but you had the 'right' motivation.
I think Andrew Card got it right (at the point when the plane hit the second WTC tower)
Not exactly rocket science. at least 10 million had the same thought and a million, including me said it.
I remember my exact words watching the 2nd plane and talking to the retired colonel next to me within sight of the Pentagon.
"We're at war. I don't know who we're at war with, but we're at war with somebody"
"So, everything you said was factually inaccurate but you had the 'right' motivation."
No; the main point "Someone was arrested for engaging in hostile actions," was right. The supporting details were wrong.
"At least the French police haven't shot up any neighborhoods or newspaper delivery ladies while in pursuit."
And they haven't issued a "shelter-in-place" order for an entire city.
"And they haven't issued a "shelter-in-place" order for an entire city."
-- Should they have? We've got two hostage situations going now, and more dead bodies. Would telling people to bunker down until this was figured out possibly prevent that? Even if it would have, should they have done it from the standpoint that we don't want the police being able to tell people when to bunker in?
It's a tough call either way.
Where are the moderate, peace-loving French Imans? Shouldn't a prominent Muslim be helping the police? Perhaps talking to the murderers to get them to let the hostages go before doing themselves in? Shouldn't they be doing everything they can to show that this is not Islam? Hmmm....
Might be time for France to build a wall around the banlieues. I'm sureit is okay as long as Israel doesn't do it.
I am Laslo.
"In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre."
Not necessarily. Eric Frein murdered two State Police troopers in an ambush of the police barracks last September and was at large in the Poconos -- a wild wooded area not so unlike descriptions of the area where the French terrorists are now at large -- for 48 days before he was caught. And that was a killing of state troopers at the police barracks with a manhunt involving something like 1,000 officers. Being armed certainly helps -- I cannot comprehend the logic behind disarming the police -- but no police in any country are magicians.
Gut shoot and then do a very thorough search for booby traps before letting the EMTs in. Like a few days worth of searching.
Incomprehensibly, US gun control imbeciles are using their horror to claim that it shows the need for more gun control everywhere. now, journalists in the US would never be armed, given that they are commie stooges, but a couple of journalists with pistols might have had a good effect.
As a side note to the topic, I've noticed with disgust how the cool kids are all of a sudden being ostentatiously pro-free speech and "western values" over this Charlie Hebdo thing. It seems that all the little herd-of-independent-mind progs can't get their weepy little "Je suis Charlie" banners and avatars and retweets and facebook posts up and out fast enough.
Hey, where were you guys in the last decade when all those other people were getting threatened and attacked by these holy warriors, or sacked and fined and jailed all over the West, for exercising what you seem to have just noticed is the sacred right to free speech?
Oh, that's right, you were all banging your drums for "hate speech" laws and mewling about "insensitivity" and "hate speech (i.e. opinions I don't like) isn't free speech" and "privileged discourse" and other such inanities. But now they're murdering decent people, you know, like these lefty and commie cartoonists who were down with everything from the multi-kult to the government of France dissolving "right wing" political parties and, well, that just won't stand.
Tomorrow they'll be back to clamoring for laws against "Islamophobia" and the suppression of dissident views, without missing a beat.
How can so much time have passed without stopping these men? In the United States, we would expect the police to stop them at least at the point when they emerged from the building where they carried out their massacre.
We would? There are lots of police in Paris, but not on every block. One cop who tried to stop them was killed. He was outgunned by men with semiautomatic weapons and a simple, well conceived plan. This was a small unit military operation. Unless we stop worrying about militarizing our police, and do a lot more of it, we can't expect that they will be able to respond effectively to something like this.
Bill R said...
We are ALL under attack.
"As I repeatedly have said, you can be a good person or you can be a good Muslim. The Venn diagram showing an overlap between those two categories does not exist except in the minds of apologist hacks, progressive idiots, and Hollywood--which is to say the same thing. It is with Islam as it is with Communism, Nazism, or KKKism, you can be an honorable and good person, or you can believe in that mind-rot." -- The DiploMad
"I’d rather die standing than live on my knees."
We now know the NYT reply.
AReasonableMan said...Cheney hiding out in an 'undisclosed location' was the perfect example of this. Panicky cowards who led this country astray at a time when level headed leadership was needed.
I see. So the secret service following long-standing protocol is an example of ridiculous melodrama. If you mattered, you might be dangerous. Fortunately, you don't.
It seems that none of this will stop until the average Muslim is a widow.
I am Laslo.
Andrew Card: "I think there is a war on terror. Maybe the words aren’t used anymore, but there’d better be a war on terror, because the terrorists want to do war on us. Terrorists declared a war on the U.S. and Great Britain and Spain and other thriving democracies."
I don't know how an intelligent person could argue with that.
Terrorists rely on useful idiots in the western media to overreact to their actions, thereby amplifying the modest threat that they actually represent. That is their transparent strategy. To declare that anyone is at 'war' following the actions of two individuals of Algerian descent in France is flat-out nutty.
France and the US have real problems, their R&D and manufacturing bases are in decline relative to China. This is where the real battle for national strength lies. Not in the actions of some goat fuckers in the ME.
ARM
The professor causes you to dress yourself in a clown suit and you seem to think it is Savile Row.
Probably one of the best moments ever on this blog.
Believe it or not, most people have the mind space to deal with multiple problems. There is an active, declared faction of people with an organized goal of killing people in Western countries.
You can use that long, drawn out way of saying it, or you can use the short hand that is clear and everyone understands: Terrorists are at war with Western civilization [as well as the people in their home/host countries who, frankly, don't like terrorism. Which there are actually a lot of people in the Middle East who aren't fond of small bands of armed people killing other people.]
Laslo Spatula said...
It seems that none of this will stop until the average Muslim is a widow.
There are 1.6 billion muslims. I wouldn't hold your breath.
"To declare that anyone is at 'war' following the actions of two individuals of Algerian descent in France is flat-out nutty."
It is dishonest to imply this is the first of these type of attacks.
Michael, why don't you put the Professors 'argument' in your own words and see how it stands up.
I particularly liked the idea that Bush's deer in headlights look was actually calm contemplation, especially has he had previously dismissed the plane crashing into the first tower as just an accident.
AReasonableMan said...
Terrorists rely on useful idiots in the western media to overreact to their actions, thereby amplifying the modest threat that they actually represent. That is their transparent strategy. To declare that anyone is at 'war' following the actions of two individuals of Algerian descent in France is flat-out nutty.
France and the US have real problems, their R&D and manufacturing bases are in decline relative to China. This is where the real battle for national strength lies. Not in the actions of some goat fuckers in the ME.
Terrorist attacks are only the armed tip of the iceberg.
In France, large swaths of Muslim neighborhoods are now considered "no-go" zones by French police. At last count, there are 751 Sensitive Urban Zones (Zones Urbaines Sensibles, ZUS), as they are euphemistically called. A complete list of the ZUS can be found on a French government website, complete with satellite maps and precise street demarcations. An estimated 5 million Muslims live in the ZUS, parts of France over which the French state has lost control.
Muslim immigrants are taking control of other parts of France too. In Paris and other French cities with high Muslim populations, such as Lyons, Marseilles and Toulouse, thousands of Muslims are closing off streets and sidewalks (and by extension, are closing down local businesses and trapping non-Muslim residents in their homes and offices) to accommodate overflowing crowds for Friday prayers. Some mosques have also begun broadcasting sermons and chants of "Allahu Akbar" via loudspeakers into the streets.
The weekly spectacles, which have been documented by dozens of videos posted on Youtube.com (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here), and which have been denounced as an "occupation without tanks or soldiers," have provoked anger and disbelief. But despite many public complaints, local authorities have declined to intervene because they are afraid of sparking riots.
Oh yes, it is a war on many fronts. If they do not fight back, there will be no France. Perhaps it is too late.
Is anything like this going on in the US. Nah. We have a solid border, and strict immigration controls. Don't we?
I followed a link on Instapundit, and found the following quote, which perfectly describes ARM:
"Oh man, proud man,
Drest in a little brief authority,
Most ignorant of what he’s most assur'd;
His glassy essence, like an angry ape,
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven,
As make the angels weep"
ARM, Shakespeare had your number 500 years before you were born.
"I particularly liked the idea that Bush's deer in headlights look was actually calm contemplation, "
Man, you're an arrogant bastard.
Grease the bullets with lard and let them know. Lard to a Muslim is like the Cross to a vampire. Shoot them with lard bullets and there is no martyrdom for them, no paradise, no 72 raisins. Then, when they give up, shoot them anyway.
Original Mike said...
Man, you're an arrogant bastard.
Not arrogant, disgusted. The behavior of Bush and Cheney after 9/11 will go down as one of the lowest of low points in US history.
So, I guess that's what we're going to use to distract us from the actual conversation this time? 9/11 revisionism?
Well, OK. It's at least better than secret routers.
Althouse brought up 9/11, speaking of revisionism.
Matthew Sablan said...
Believe it or not, most people have the mind space to deal with multiple problems.
And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars in the ME, when R&D and manufacturing are bleeding at home.
...
I... do you understand how the budget works?
Like, this is a serious questions. Do you understand what the government can and cannot spend money on? Do you understand how money is allocated? Do you understand how supply chains work? Do you understand how competition and R&D work?
Like, these are some... basic, I guess, things? It's... I just... when someone says something like TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON WAR INSTEAD OF MANUFACTURING, I can't tell if they're trying to parody someone, or if they just... don't get how politics and money work.
If you understand, then, ha ha, good joke! You got me.
If, though, this was meant to be a serious point, taken as though it were some deep insight...
We're just going to stop, because I can't start a conversation about something where the starting point is not even on the same planet as "basic understanding of politics and economics." It's OK to disagree, or even be wrong -- but to not even have tried to understand is just an insult and waste of everyone who tries to talk to you's time.
Matthew, despite all your blather you failed to make a point. Try again. As a lawyer I recognize that your sole marketable skill is obfuscation, but if this is as important as you say why not make an effort to play against type?
"I particularly liked the idea that Bush's deer in headlights look was actually calm contemplation."
On the first plane hitting on 9/11, Bush explained his thinking this way:
"I was stunned. That plane must have had the worst pilot in the world. How could he possibly have flown into a skyscraper on a clear day? Maybe he’d had a heart attack. I told Condi to stay on top of the situation and asked my communications director, Dan Bartlett, to work on a statement promising the full support of federal emergency management services."
"Decision Points" (pp. 126-127).
On hearing Andrew Card say "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.":
"My first reaction was outrage. Someone had dared attack America. They were going to pay. Then I looked at the faces of the children in front of me. I thought about the contrast between the brutality of the attackers and the innocence of those children. Millions like them would soon be counting on me to protect them. I was determined not to let them down.
"I saw reporters at the back of the room, learning the news on their cell phones and pagers. Instinct kicked in. I knew my reaction would be recorded and beamed throughout the world. The nation would be in shock; the president could not be. If I stormed out hastily, it would scare the children and send ripples of panic throughout the country.
"The reading lesson continued , but my mind raced far from the classroom. Who could have done this? How bad was the damage? What did the government need to do?
"Press Secretary Ari Fleischer positioned himself between the reporters and me. He held up a sign that read “Don’t say anything yet.” I didn’t plan to. I had settled on a plan of action: When the lesson ended, I would leave the classroom calmly, gather the facts, and speak to the nation."
Decision Points (p. 127).
It's over. After we finish blaming the victims for provocation, we will be able to get back to important cultural topics like 'manspreading.'
I particularly liked the idea that Bush's deer in headlights look was actually calm contemplation, especially has he had previously dismissed the plane crashing into the first tower as just an accident.
A large majority of people assumed the first plane to be an accident. In fact, that is how it was initially report.
Second, I can forgive the deer in the headlights look as I may have the same look if that were whispered in my ear while I was reading to schoolchildren, and on camera.
His decision then and there NOT to react too brusquely actually denies your 'melodrama' claim.
But I don't want to talk about George Bush.
I will give ARM credit for the observations that
A. While terrorists may be "at war with the world", they are for the most part, largely ineffectual in actually making war as we currently know it.
B. The media does play their part in amplifying the desired effect of terrorism, which is to "create terror."
However, I do believe that the Western world as we know it is on a collision course with radical Islam, and that ultimately there will be a large global conflict as a result. Call it World War IV if you like. In fact, we all already fighting it, it's just unlike any other "war" in which we've fought. (We is the Western world, not the U.S. directly.)
To ignore that fact can be quite foolish.
"The behavior of Bush and Cheney after 9/11 will go down as one of the lowest of low points in US history."
One suspects that your disapproval of the Bush/Cheney reaction would have been as deep no matter what they had done.
We WILL account for taste, as God as my witness, we will.
The best thing going forward is to know if it happens on your watch, except for maybe 90-100 days in, you fucked up.
Reagan woulda tore down Gorelick's wall; Bush was golfing and thinking about getting Jeb elected in 2008 to make papa proud. The idea "he kept us safe" is an insult to the soldiers and support and TAX dollars that did keep us safe, whilst being disgustingly submissive and grateful for what should be considered of minimal accomplishment not something to brag about because the atmosphere was so darn scary 9/12.
Can't blame Bush for the economy either, he was only POTUS fercrissakes not the Lightbringer or Barney ^**^^+ Frank.
Can't blame Bush for America being so weakened and sickened she elected Barry Obama neither; George W. had a tough tough job don't ya know. By golly his hair turned grey!
Beside the craziness of their actions it is the cowardice of terrorists that strikes me.
Can you believe ARM said "goat fuckers in the ME"? I can almost forgive him some of his other views because of that phrase!
Having given up on military means, we in the West are also unlikely to do anything via law enforcement to prevent such attacks in the future.
Don't waste time blathering about imaginative (and illegal) ways to punish such people. It's not going to happen, nor would we wish to see it.
But it would certainly help if we stopped imagining these terrorists to be aberrations from true Islam. Such fanaticism is only to be expected and there is no telling where it will occur. And appeasement through "reasonable accommodation" will only encourage more of it.
I shot the Cherif and then we shot his deputy.
NotquiteunBuckley said...
because the atmosphere was so darn scary 9/12.
No it wasn't. The next day I took my two young boys down to Union square and we lit candles for the dead. I took them in order to show them that there was nothing to fear.
There were thousands doing the same thing. Terrorism only succeeds when people panic.
And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars in the ME, when R&D and manufacturing are bleeding at home.
You want the government sending your money to corporations?
I thought corporate welfare was, you know, bad. I know I still oppose it. I'm a little surprised you are on board with it.
I particularly liked the idea that Bush's deer in headlights look was actually calm contemplation, especially has he had previously dismissed the plane crashing into the first tower as just an accident.
Why would you assume a report of a plan flying into the WTC as an absolute sure-fire terrorist attack?
You should want somebody who will wait for more info before making rash decisions.
Hey, where were you guys in the last decade when all those other people were getting threatened and attacked by these holy warriors, or sacked and fined and jailed all over the West, for exercising what you seem to have just noticed is the sacred right to free speech?
Hell, Angelyne, where were they when Obama imprisoned a filmmaker to cover up Benghazi?
Terrorists rely on useful idiots in the western media to overreact to their actions, thereby amplifying the modest threat that they actually represent. That is their transparent strategy. To declare that anyone is at 'war' following the actions of two individuals of Algerian descent in France is flat-out nutty.
But all being potential rapists --- that is responsible journalism.
Pro-lifers being murderers --- also, TOTALLY responsible journalism.
There were thousands doing the same thing. Terrorism only succeeds when people panic.
Progressives bitched about Bush telling people to go about their lives as usual.
AReasonableMeltdown: "No it wasn't. The next day I took my two young boys down to Union square and we lit candles for the dead. I took them in order to show them that there was nothing to fear."
I wonder if those folks in the Jewish Deli in Paris today would agree with ARMeltdown?
The fuck you took your "two young children" to union square on 9/12.
We haven't had someone make up personal and family history to support their retarded liberal nonsense since the heady days when Inga still posted under that bug eyed photo.
You really take the cake with this one, UnReasonable Bitch.
"And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars in the ME, when R&D and manufacturing are bleeding at home."
Now here's a recurring theme that needs some explaining. There is no reason to believe that money not spent by the government on war would therefore logically be spent by corporations on more R&D and manufacturing. Two different sets of actors, ya see. Vastly different motivations and unknown variables. Unless, perhaps, you mean we should have instead lowered taxes enough to stimulate such activity.
There were thousands doing the same thing. Terrorism only succeeds when people panic.
Well, that is true, but it is hard for a democratic government to survive it is appears to be insensitive to civilian losses and unable to protect its citizens.
I'll remind AReasonable man that a single assassination sparked WWI. so it doesn't take a full on invasion to lead to wars.
In France there is radical jihadist activity that is at its worst since 9/11. A lot of it is home grown radicalization because Muslims in many cases are not becoming part of france's society. Multiculturalism just creates muslim neighborhoods divorced from society at large.
Add to this that these same radicals go overseas, get trained and then come back.
Paris Massacre Suspects Killed in Dramatic Raid, Sources Say
Areasonableman wrote:
AReasonableMeltdown: "No it wasn't. The next day I took my two young boys down to Union square and we lit candles for the dead. I took them in order to show them that there was nothing to fear."
nothing to fear unless you were on an airplane that flew into the WTC that day. Or in the WTC. Or around the WTC. Or a first responder who arrive on the scene after the fact.
And responding to terrorism by holding those accountable waging war against us is not fear.
[Regarding fear after 9/11]: "No it wasn't. The next day I took my two young boys down to Union square and we lit candles for the dead. I took them in order to show them that there was nothing to fear."
No one in the military was afraid, either. We were mightily pissed, however. We understood the nature of the threat and we were too busy doing something about it. That's not to say there was nothing to fear. Left unchecked, it would have (and now will) happen again. And reliance solely upon law enforcement is not going to prevent it.
By the way AReasonableMan. The Union Square is on 14th street. The bombed out crater of The WTC was much further downtown. So, you didn't exactly take your kids to ground zero when you put down your flowers.
Those trying to dig through the rubble being exposed to asbestos and dust had a lot to fear.
Since ARM us flinging "cowardice" bullsh*t...(and knows sh*t-all about what French Jews have been through recently, btw)
Obama and Hillary watching Benghazi unfold over real-time drone feed for seven hours and doing nothing except waiting for the men defending the CIA annex to die before sending Susan Rice out later to lie about it shows some real profiles in,courage.
If your only response when a group commits an act of war is to take your kids to a safe locarion and put down flowers then you are engaged in willful blindness.
9/11 was successful for Al Qaeda until we went after Al Qaeda and decimated their ranks and killed their leaders and dried up their funding.
Imagine if 9/11 was carried out and out response was to send our kids to put out flowers and then went on about our business.
OBL would say "see, I told you that the US was nothing but a paper tiger. we struck them in their heart and they have no response."
And plans would be underway for 9/11 part 2.
One of the brothers was a "jobber"! He sold fish.
AReasonableman juat because we were not at war does not mean THEY were not at war. So you can put out your little flowers all you want. meanwhile they will be plotting to wage war against their enemies.
There were thousands doing the same thing. Terrorism only succeeds when people panic.
I remember Pres. Bush going on nat'l TV *immediately* after the 9/11 attacks to remind us that the highjackers were not representative of the Islamic faith.
"Islam means 'Peace'", right, ARM? You remember that, too, but you're just too craven to admit it.
There was actually a third gunman killed in a different location who killed a cop. Also involved in taempt to break another terrorist out of jail.
Both brothers were on no fly zones for years and were known as being involved with Al Qaeda. The elder brother travelled to Yemen and trained with Al QAeda.
The younger brother was arrested for trying to join Al Qaeda in Iraq,
And now we find them back in civilian society murdering people.
It's over. Both Kouachi's killed and a hostage rescued, 4 hostages and an Islamic terrorist killed at a kosher market:
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/01/09/paris-terror-suspects-cornered-with-hostage-want-to-die-as-martyrs/
"There were thousands doing the same thing. Terrorism only succeeds when people panic."
No, terrorism succeeds when it succeeds. these two brothers got into the building and shot 9 people. Success!
What could possibly be motivating these you men to go bad? What could it be?
First we have to apply PC to eliminate a large number of possible causes. Then we wring our hands at being unable to make the remaining pieces fit!
They are having a "unity rally" where they are not allowing the one party who anticipated this kind of thing.
That is political gold for Le Pen
The French terrorists exposed the hypocritical underbelly of Hebdo and liberal society.
I think it would be great satire to publish comics depicting Hebdo publishing pro-choice comics in Gosnell's little clinic of horrors, surrounded by decapitated and dismembered bodies, with clumps of cells blocking every available toilet. Hebdo would be plunging with all of his strength to flush the evidence before his "decent" patrons condemn him for violating their delicate sensibilities with a mass slaughter brought by their pro-choice (i.e. selective) moral principles. Obama can stand next to him, crying: will no one rid me of this burden!?
Oh, well. Hebdo was a coward, who enjoyed mocking people who were not of his church: atheist and libertine. As with other members of his church including FEMENists, and organizations including Planned Parenthood, they are offended by Islamic terrorists' graphic depictions of premeditated abortion of human life outside of the sanctioned periods: conception to death, really. Pro-choice reduces human life to a commodity throughout its evolution.
It's funny, really. Both capital punishment and planned parenthood employ lethal injection. Both Islamic terrorists and planned parenthood employ decapitation and dismemberment to secure "rewards". The notable difference is that Islamic terrorists commit murder of marginally innocent, and perhaps guilty, men and women. Whereas planned parenthood has a single intent and purpose to commit mass collateral damage, that is a rare occurrence even in war.
Hebdo and other pro-choicers are bigots who displaced their moral cowardice, and embrace money, sex, ego, and convenience. Unfortunately, for Hebdo et al, one of their targets decided to fight back. I would have suggested a comic that exposes the bigotry of Hebdo et al. Islamic terrorists want a liberal society, including pro-choice and material opiates. That would have been great parody of Hebdo's comics.
And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars.."
For a moment I thought ARM had a flash of lucidity and was referencing the War On Poverty and other progressive projects.
9-11 only happened because of America's long history of colonialism in Saudi Arabia.
The Muslim's ability to nurse a grudge is amazing.
tim in vermont: "The Muslim's ability to nurse a grudge is amazing."
The leftist ability to coddle muslims and assist in the nursing of the grudges is even more amazing.
"And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars.."
it seems like ISIS is doing very well for itself waging wars. And despite the futility of war Obamas only response seems to be bombing them. Which is a military action. And many are saying it's not good enough. We need to do MORE than just bomb.
Would any of it be necessary if ISIS wasn't taking over cities in the ME?
Trashhauler said...
"And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars in the ME, when R&D and manufacturing are bleeding at home."
Now here's a recurring theme that needs some explaining. There is no reason to believe that money not spent by the government on war would therefore logically be spent by corporations on more R&D and manufacturing. Two different sets of actors, ya see. Vastly different motivations and unknown variables. Unless, perhaps, you mean we should have instead lowered taxes enough to stimulate such activity.
1/9/15, 11:05 AM"
Dude, ARM's position makes perfect sense if you are a Communist.
Not to go all Biblical on ARM but you shouldn't take comfort in the fact that, for now, being a victim of terrorism is a long shot. Remember:
"The obtuse shall inherit some dirt."
That's in the Bible somewhere.
I wouldn't hold your breath.
How do you hold someone else's breath?
"How do you hold someone else's breath?"
I think it called strangulation.
And grownups learn to prioritize, not spend trillions on futile wars in the ME, when R&D and manufacturing are bleeding at home.
That's just stupid.
So ARM is upset about the lack of grant money for "research." The obvious solution is central direction for the economy.
Of course, dirigist economies seem to invest most heavily in stealing ideas, methods, and technologies from countries that leave these matters to free markets.
For a moment I thought ARM had a flash of lucidity and was referencing the War On Poverty and other progressive projects.
I think you meant For a moment I thought ARM had a flash of lucidity and was referencing the War On Poverty and other progressive failures.
jr565 said...
If your only response when a group commits an act of war is to take your kids to a safe location
But that is the point. It was a safe location. Our risk from terrorism is miniscule. Our response was out of proportion in terms of its cost to this nation financially, in lives lost, in liberties lost and in the cost it will impose in fostering further terrorist acts.
ARM said;
"Our risk from terrorism is miniscule."
ARM is correct. The threat of terrorism to people who are careful not to do anything that might call Muslim attention to them, is quite small. He is declaring himself to be a dhimmi. He, for one, welcomes our new Muslim censors.
Jupiter said...
He, for one, welcomes our new Muslim censors.
Bullshit. I trend libertarian on free speech.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন