Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say • Hacker News Board

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#631

Post by TeMPOraL » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 2:59 PM UTC

mercurial wrote: post #627

TeMPOraL wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#632

Post by andrepd » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:12 PM UTC

iMark wrote: post #213

andrepd wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's precisely the point. Bar psychopaths, nearly everyone thinks they are doing the right thing, even as they do horrors. These people are so deeply indoctrinated that they think they are ultimately doing good in the eyes of god.

That's equating "do no harm" with "do the right thing". I don't believe the comparison stands.

Good point.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#633

Post by mercurial » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:18 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #631

mercurial wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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?

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#634

Post by stefantalpalaru » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:24 PM UTC

qb45 wrote: post #579

stefantalpalaru wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> heavy immigration of refugees It's much more likely that the terrorists come from the frustrated youth born and raised in France, than some fresh immigrants.

Honestly, I'm curious what makes you think that the children of the new ones will be different? When people like, say, Angela Merkel, advocate blindly accepting all those thousands of refuges smuggled to the EU, I just can't really understand - what's the point?

The point is that our pensions system is crashing because people stopped making 2.2 children on average because they no longer needed children to survive in their old age. They payed their taxes so they have a guaranteed pension, right?

Wrong, those taxes were already used to pay the pensions in the same year they were collected. Now the shrinking work force is straining itself to pay for the increasing number of old farts, and the future is bleak.

We need young immigrants in Europe. We need them to work for us and make children for us. At least until they get rich and complacent like us and settle for 1 child per family.

There are ways to integrate them culturally, once their children are in our school system. And there are ways to avoid the chronic poverty and marginalization that plagues french banlieues. What we don't have is a way to keep paying those pensions with more and more pensioners leeching on fewer and fewer workers.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#635

Post by iofj » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:29 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #555

Fluid_Mechanics wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we didn't need to secure their oil by supporting/deposing despots in the region, and didn't want to provide the Israelis with military/political/financial support then we would not be dealing with any of this carnage. Their attempts to fight back will only escalate the situation, and the carnage will continue. Edit: I'm not advocating that we not support Israel. I'm simply stating a hard truth regarding "why they…

How do you know? Imagine another 700m people even poorer than they are now. That might breed extremism I'm sure western meddling can explain some of the extremist responses, but I'm not sure it can explain all of them.

Looking at those arrested for joining ISIS here in my home country I don't know how you can say that. They were not poor, they were not excluded or treated in a racist manner at all. And there are very little lines between them, men and women, from different parts of the country, from different backgrounds (semi-rural versus rural, native/non-native, dutch, french, english-speaking, rich/middle class (I'd say no poor people so far), ...).

About the only link between the ISIS members from Western Europe is that they're muslims. Even that is "not 100%" true, since there are also Christians and some Kurds traveling to Syria/Iraq. The examples of that I know went there to help, of course (medically in 2 cases, sort of an amateur doctors without borders, mostly because neither doctors without borders, nor the red cross risk sending people there, but they did have family there). Of course we don't know that's all they did. At least they're claiming to provide medical help, none of the muslims who got caught going to Syria ever even bothered to say they were going for any reason other than fighting, and some saying they went off for killing and some shit about allah.

This is a convicted ISIS terrorist that went off to kill people and came back, talking to a reporter of the public service about how and why : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKg2UsfnxHc

Claiming that people like this are poor or treated badly by the country they were born into is moronic.

Meanwhile the tensions between (sunni) muslims and everybody, literally everybody else are rising ever more. Fights and crimes against the "natives", and every other minority, from the Jews of Antwerp to the Turks of Molenbeek (there is a large (sometimes very) atheist contingent amongst Turks).

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#636

Post by j42 » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:34 PM UTC

wsc981 wrote: post #513

j42 wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does if you play devil's advocate and follow the chain of reasoning. If god is great and non-believers are bad and "god" says it's righteous and just to punish the non-believers, then naturally doing "god's work" is doing no harm? Actually the truth is even messier... most of these young men committing atrocities are merely indoctrinated pawns who know very little of their own religion and instead defer to their "…

Actually the truth is even messier... most of these young men committing atrocities are merely indoctrinated pawns who know very little of their own religion and instead defer to their "emir." How can you claim that these young men know very little about their own religion? The Koran and Hadiths are full of hateful texts. Muhammed himself beheaded a tribe of jews according to the Hadiths. Most (all?) Muslims think Mu…

You may have misunderstood me there.

Yes, Islam is a particularly violent religion -- if you have read the Koran, many of its concepts seem very incompatible with the idea of a free secular society. Then again, the bible has the crusades.

I'm personally an atheist and I honestly don't think the problem is the the text itself but the cultural, ideological conflicts of an impoverished region that allows whoever "shouts the loudest" to assume power. The kids committing these atrocities probably couldn't even tell you what you just told me about Mohammad -- my point is that they are brainwashed and utterly uneducated so whomever comes along and says "this is god's word" is who they will listen to.

Anger + Desperation - Education = Extremism

You won't solve this problem by banning the Koran, but if you can get Muslims everywhere to renounce this "us-or-them" culture in favor of a more moderate interpretation (you know, how all religions seem to evolve if they want to survive) then perhaps we can neuter these kinds of groups before there's a power-vacuum?

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#637

Post by 6stringmerc » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 3:43 PM UTC

Asbostos wrote: post #343

6stringmerc wrote: post #331

Of all the wonderful and dangerous developments that technology has granted our species, I'm saddened to think that we have yet to find a pathway to the human spirit that can help reduce hatred and the impulses that result in such terrible actions. From school shootings in the US to warlords in distant lands, there's so much yet to achieve in the name of progress, for human kind. Surely, we have much to do, and as tr…

Don't worry. Driverless cars are coming and the lives they save will quickly outweigh all deaths from terrorism and mass shootings. The US will be such a massively safer place without those 30,000 road deaths each year. It'll be able to sustain another 9/11 incident every year and still be safer than before. So I don't think we need to solve this problem. We're already well on the way to solving the real problems. Te…

You're missing the point - at the root of all societal discord is an intellectual and emotional disconnect, which is, practically speaking, now easier facilitated by technology. That is, people fueled by hatred are much more driven and capable of mobilizing with technological advances than groups who wish to address the root causes. Driverless cars are simply a "feel good" development, along the lines of bariatric surgery. I'm talking about getting deeper into the human psyche for the benefit of all mankind, which isn't a "negligible" type of pursuit. Also, if society valued lives via driving, people would be subjected to more rigorous testing using technology, not simply cut out of the loop.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#638

Post by jameshart » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 4:15 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #434

TeMPOraL wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh you would, if that was the only way to ensure survival and/or a better future for them. It would be painful, but you would feel you have to do this.

No, I would not. Absolutely not. No way. I would send the wife and kids first before going myself.

You seem to misunderstand what displaced people want. Why would you send them away and stay in a refugee camp? Refugee camps are precisely the first relatively safe place displaced people find. They are attended by aid agencies, and provide basic needs. They are temporarily a place of shelter and food. Traveling on the road from border crossing to border crossing around Europe is less safe than staying put in the refugee camp. You'll need to find food and shelter in different places each night. You will be hassled by authorities. You might end up living rough on the streets of Ljubljana for the winter. But if you make it to Berlin you might be able to apply for asylum, find a job, and get enough money together to bring your family (if you have papers, they will be able to use trains or planes - they won't have to walk 800 miles). That seems a rational calculation for a young man.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#639

Post by myegorov » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 4:25 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #556

myegorov wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that with asymmetrical warfare resorting to terrorism is rational. What seems irrational is our inability to recognize the struggle of our enemy for what it's worth and our refusal to negotiate. I can't think of an example where negotiations (as in granting that your partner in negotiations is your peer) haven't led to a net positive outcome. To take but one example close to home: The Soviet Union was founded…

How about chamberlains negotiations with Hitler?

I understand your point is that direct confrontation at times cannot be avoided. In particular, you may be provoked to defend yourself, as in the Soviet Union entering WWII upon Germany violating the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. I'm of the opinion that only this latter case of agression justifies taking up arms. Any violence by way of preventive action lends itself too easily to abuses, as we see with the so-called war on terrorism. In the context of WWII, it's not at all clear that anything other than collective action of the allies and the Soviet Union could have stopped Germany. And for that, the events had to run their course. One can find fault with indecision on refugees, but not with appeasement efforts.

Re: Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

#640

Post by Turing_Machine » Sat, Nov 14, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #638

Turing_Machine wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I would not. Absolutely not. No way. I would send the wife and kids first before going myself.

You seem to misunderstand what displaced people want. Why would you send them away and stay in a refugee camp? Refugee camps are precisely the first relatively safe place displaced people find. They are attended by aid agencies, and provide basic needs. They are temporarily a place of shelter and food. Traveling on the road from border crossing to border crossing around Europe is less safe than staying put in the ref…

No, I'm not "misunderstanding" anything. If the refugee camp is safe, has food, etc., there's no reason for anyone to leave on a dangerous journey. If it's not safe, there's no excuse for leaving your children there.

I realize that life in Germany is more pleasant than life in a refugee camp in Turkey (or has been, historically... that seems to be changing), but that's an entirely different thing.