Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you ever work in another country? I work in Germany with colleagues from many different countries, and our country does not suck. The French post is one of the best in the World, train delays are the same in France as in Germany (shall we compare with the situation in the US?), the administration is a PITA but they actually try to help instead of killing you (+ the number of organisms to help startups in France i…
> Did you ever work in another country? Yes. I'm currently working in another country and I've been studying in Japan for a year. So I have few points of comparison. Terrorism is not just a question of numbers. The problem is more about how the government handle the matter. When you read things like terrorists getting welfare[1] for years, the fact they can keep the nationality[2] and returnees jihadists from Syria w…
[2] is true, but it should be noted that this is standard procedure in the West, since citizenship is considered one the most inalienable rights (in Germany, loss of citizenship only occurs through taking another one; in the US, it's only possible for naturalized citizens to lose their citizenship if they commit terrorism within 5 years of being naturalized).
[3] the article does not say that djihadis will be welcomed.
[4] is standard procedure in the West. You can't detain people who don't even stand accused, unless you're the US and have absolutely no concern about egregiously violating your constitution (and human rights). And tracking 15,000 people is beyond what any police force can do.
[5][6] it is generally not a good idea to comment on criminal trials, since you have access to very little compared to the judges and jury. It's also unclear that detention is a good solution to the problem anyways.
[7] is perfectly correct.
[8] it is considered prosecutable, this person is on trial. Also see [6], and again, unless you have a very good reason to think the accused actually knew he was hosting terrorists (which the judges, who have access to far more information that you do, don't), there's nothing visibly wrong about that trial.
Finally,
> Anyway I could simply have started my post with a question, like you did: did you ever had a friend got shot in a terror attack? > > I guess not, otherwise you would not just speak about numbers.
It's not with strong feelings that you'll make good policy. It's very sad that people die, but it's no good reason to drop all common sense.