# Jihadi Attacks...Who is Next?



## Don M. (Nov 16, 2015)

The recent downing of the Russian Airliner, the bombing in Lebanon, and now this Paris tragedy, are setting up to be a banner month for the Jihadists.  Their followers will be inspired to continue these vicious attacks.  ISIS is showing the capability to wreak havoc on the "Infidels" with minimum losses to themselves.  A Military commander would be elated with the "kill ratio" these attacks are having.  

There will be major repercussions over the Paris attack, but that will most likely be short lived, and after a large number of air strikes, etc., against these Jihadists, the public mood will once again revert to mostly apathy.  

Places like NYC, Washington DC, London, and Paris will continue to remain on high alert for some time, but most cities will revert to a more normal routine within a very few weeks.  The Jihadists will lay low for a few weeks, and plot their next move.  The "Soft Targets" in places like Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta, and secondary cities all over Europe will afford the Jihadists an endless array of possible easy targets.  The successes of these most recent attacks will inspire even more Lunatics to eliminate as many Infidels as possible.  Once again, "Guerilla tactics" will prove far more effective than massed conventional military forces.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

Which brings me to my question.. We have people calling for war.. War with who?  and more importantly war WHERE?  The danger is in the attacks on our soil from ISIS sympathizers.. What will going to Syria and wiping them out there do to prevent more attacks like Paris?


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 16, 2015)

Being a movement it's tough to pin down their targets or who will actually execute a mission for them- a self made lone wolf or facilitated cell. This is a movement that can come and go through out the course of man. Hopefully it only becomes fashionable every thousand years or so.


----------



## hollydolly (Nov 16, 2015)

Today they have allegedly  issued a threat saying that Washington is Next... 

ISIS has  issued a chilling new video warning that countries taking part in air  strikes against Syria would suffer the same fate as Paris and claimed  they will attack Washington D.C. next.
The  specific threat against the US capital emerged as CIA director John  Brennan warned that more atrocities will be committed against the West  by the Islamist terror group. 
In  the film an armed fighter addresses the camera to say in Arabic: 'We  say to the states that take part in the crusader campaign that, by God,  you will have a day God willing, like France's and by God, as we struck  France in the centre of its abode in Paris, then we swear that we will  strike America at its centre in Washington.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-threat-attack-Washington.html#ixzz3rfz5dgac 

​


----------



## imp (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Which brings me to my question.. We have people calling for war.. War with who?  and more importantly war WHERE?  The danger is in the attacks on our soil from ISIS sympathizers.. *What will going to Syria and wiping them out there do to prevent more attacks like Paris*?



Very little, IMO. Such activity gives cover for other clandestine work which otherwise would be unpopular for elected leaders.   imp


----------



## imp (Nov 16, 2015)

hollydolly said:


> Today they have allegedly  issued a threat saying that Washington is Next...
> 
> ISIS has  issued a chilling new video warning that countries taking part in air  strikes against Syria would suffer the same fate as Paris and claimed  they will attack Washington D.C. next.
> The  specific threat against the US capital emerged as CIA director John  Brennan warned that more atrocities will be committed against the West  by the Islamist terror group.
> ...



Today, our local paper carried a letter to the Editor stating that the folks in Paris were executed seemingly at random, like helpless, defenseless animals being slaughtered. It was mentioned specifically that being disarmed, those people, including security guards, had no means of defending against the killers.

Washington, DC? The leaders are safe enough, regardless of the degree of infiltration by terrorists. The danger exists primarily to security forces, who are armed and trained to fight back, and the citizenry at large, which is mostly disarmed and helpless, given such attack.    imp


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

imp said:


> Today, our local paper carried a letter to the Editor stating that the folks in Paris were executed seemingly at random, like helpless, defenseless animals being slaughtered. It was mentioned specifically that being disarmed, those people, including security guards, had no means of defending against the killers.
> 
> Washington, DC? The leaders are safe enough, regardless of the degree of infiltration by terrorists. The danger exists primarily to security forces, who are armed and trained to fight back, and the citizenry at large, which is mostly disarmed and helpless, given such attack.    imp



So is the answer in your opinion that every man woman and child in the USA have a weapon on their person?   OR maybe just select civilians.. what would the ration be 10 unarmed to 1 armed?


----------



## Don M. (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Which brings me to my question.. We have people calling for war.. War with who?  and more importantly war WHERE?  The danger is in the attacks on our soil from ISIS sympathizers.. What will going to Syria and wiping them out there do to prevent more attacks like Paris?



That's right.  There are already hundreds, perhaps thousands, of ISIS sympathizers living in Europe, and N. America....with more on the way, "joining" the Syrian refugees.  No amount of bombing campaigns, or conventional military actions is going to change that.  If anything, increased bombing, etc., is just going to motivate the next "Boston Marathon" bombers.  The Lunatics can get on the Internet, and find plans to build deadly bombs, and find the parts needed at the department/hardware/sporting goods stores.  Guns and ammo can be readily purchased on the Black Market in any major city...without having to go through any "background" checks. 

Increased intelligence, and surveillance are probably the Only tools that will stand a chance of preventing this activity.  Despite the Howls of our Politically Correct...social media, internet, and phone traffic, etc., may need much closer scrutiny, to intercept these lunatics before they can act.  If it "looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck"...it may be necessary to assume that it IS a duck, until proven otherwise....even if such actions result in "Profiling".


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

Don M. said:


> That's right.  There are already hundreds, perhaps thousands, of ISIS sympathizers living in Europe, and N. America....with more on the way, "joining" the Syrian refugees.  No amount of bombing campaigns, or conventional military actions is going to change that.  If anything, increased bombing, etc., is just going to motivate the next "Boston Marathon" bombers.  The Lunatics can get on the Internet, and find plans to build deadly bombs, and find the parts needed at the department/hardware/sporting goods stores.  Guns and ammo can be readily purchased on the Black Market in any major city...without having to go through any "background" checks.
> 
> Increased intelligence, and surveillance are probably the Only tools that will stand a chance of preventing this activity.  Despite the Howls of our Politically Correct...social media, internet, and phone traffic, etc., may need much closer scrutiny, to intercept these lunatics before they can act.  If it "looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck"...it may be necessary to assume that it IS a duck, until proven otherwise....even if such actions result in "Profiling".



Normally part of the "politically correct" howling group...  We part company on this.  I am and always have been in favor of surveillance of phone, email and other social media  feeling that it was the only way to wage war against this type of terror.  I'll gladly assume the DHS knows all about my sister's gallbladder.. if they know about the guy a mile away building a bomb.


----------



## imp (Nov 16, 2015)

*Profiling?*



Don M. said:


> ....even if such actions result in "Profiling".



Too late now. Profiling has resulted in much higher rates of unnecessary, inconvenient, often illegal, detainment, some resulting in charges being pressed even though L.E. awareness exists of innocence. A natural consequence of profiling. IOW, screw up the lives of a few poor suckers in order to thwart terrorism, real or imagined, and "save" the citizenry. 

Gotta be a more equitable way, but ain't found one yet.   imp


----------



## squatting dog (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> So is the answer in your opinion that every man woman and child in the USA have a weapon on their person?   OR maybe just select civilians.. what would the ration be 10 unarmed to 1 armed?



I don't know about a ratio, but, if just a couple of people in that theater had been armed, I don't believe it would have been that difficult to eliminate the 2 shooters, and at the very least, lower the amount of carnage they produced. Please keep in mind, that any former military person has been trained and taught the correct way to handle a firearm, and how to react to a particular situation. Also, anyone who has a concealed carry permit has gone through an extensive background check and proper training and is not the crazy cowboy that a lot of people picture of gun toting Americans thanks to the media. 
 Now, knowing this... wouldn't you acknowledge that there could be a possibility that these theater shooters might not have been as successful had someone been able to return fire?


----------



## imp (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> So is the answer in your opinion that every man woman and child in the USA have a weapon on their person?   OR maybe just select civilians.. what would the ration be 10 unarmed to 1 armed?



QS, I did not suggest an "answer", simply wrote what story had to offer, by one who was PRESENT. It's easy for us to conjecture while sitting in our own safety. I would hope your question was written facetiously. 

You asked my opinion. Here, then: It should be the _choice _of all responsible law-abiding adults to be armed, with whatever means seems fittest, to each. When an individual seriously steps "out of line", they get taken away, armed or not.   imp


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

squatting dog said:


> I don't know about a ratio, but, if just a couple of people in that theater had been armed, I don't believe it would have been that difficult to eliminate the 2 shooters, and at the very least, lower the amount of carnage they produced. Please keep in mind, that any former military person has been trained and taught the correct way to handle a firearm, and how to react to a particular situation. Also, anyone who has a concealed carry permit has gone through an extensive background check and proper training and is not the crazy cowboy that a lot of people picture of gun toting Americans thanks to the media.
> Now, knowing this... wouldn't you acknowledge that there could be a possibility that these theater shooters might not have been as successful had someone been able to return fire?



Had a "couple of people" been armed and began shooting... what are the odds that they would shoot one another... Or shoot people running and screaming.   It sounds really Hollywood'ish  to think you could,  in a split second,  determine what was happening.. who the bad guys are.. and who to shoot..  Suppose a "good guy"  was also shooting from the other side of the room...  WHO would YOU shoot?   would you make the correct decision?  Doubtful.   NOW add a few more "good guys"  ALL shooting at any direction they hear shots coming from.   I contend that just as many people would have died in that concert hall.. only some of them at the had of the "good guys".   It's utter NONSENSE to believe it would have made a difference.


----------



## squatting dog (Nov 16, 2015)

QS, I highly doubt that anybody with a concealed carry permit would have been in the theater with an AK 47 or shotgun tucked in their pants.


----------



## Don M. (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I am and always have been in favor of surveillance of phone, email and other social media  feeling that it was the only way to wage war against this type of terror.  I'll gladly assume the DHS knows all about my sister's gallbladder.. if they know about the guy a mile away building a bomb.



In this type of "warfare", conventional tactics are of little value...rather, Information is the most valuable "weapon".  No one really likes to have their private information known, but in this age, we Must be willing to allow the government access to virtually everything, if we are ever going to win this struggle.  After all, it would seem to me that Only Those with Something illegal to Hide, would benefit from "secrecy".  There seems to be a great deal of desire to keep medical records hidden, but I don't understand why.  Who cares if I had a dental crown, or got new glasses this past Summer?  Anything that helps identify a potential Jihadist is OK in my book.


----------



## Lon (Nov 16, 2015)

I personally would like to see more outrage expressed by so called Good Muslim Clerics & a discrediting of the so called rewards of Martyrdom which is why Isis members are so willing to die. It's difficult to win any war where your enemy has no concern for their on lives-------


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

squatting dog said:


> QS, I highly doubt that anybody with a concealed carry permit would have been in the theater with an AK 47 or shotgun tucked in their pants.



what difference does THAT make..  The fact that people would have had to 

1. Instantly assess what was happening, when even the band member didn't know and kept right on playing after the 1st shots.  

2. Get their weapon OUT of wherever it was concealed

3.  Figure out who the shooter was and WHERE he was in a dark room with people running and screaming

4.  Take aim at and actually HIT the bad guy.. while other good guys were shooting... and not hit innocent people running for their lives.

The whole idea is laughable.. It was not a Hollywood movie in Paris that night.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 16, 2015)

squatting dog said:


> I don't know about a ratio, but, if just a couple of people in that theater had been armed, I don't believe it would have been that difficult to eliminate the 2 shooters, and at the very least, lower the amount of carnage they produced.



I agree Squatting Dog, which is the case in most of these mass shootings where there is nobody able to fire back and kill these people, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.  As you say, at the very least, it would have lowered the amount of lives taken, definitely worth it IMO, only makes sense.


----------



## Meringue (Nov 16, 2015)

Lon said:


> I personally would like to see more outrage expressed by so called Good Muslim Clerics
> 
> Indeed, but as per usual "their silence is deafening"


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Normally part of the "politically correct" howling group...  We part company on this.  I am and always have been in favor of surveillance of phone, email and other social media  feeling that it was the only way to wage war against this type of terror.  I'll gladly assume the DHS knows all about my sister's gallbladder.. if they know about the guy a mile away building a bomb.



I'm with you on this, QS.  Not too worried about the feds hearing my discussions with my sis about whether we should go shopping today or not, or her cat throwing up hairballs on her bed.


----------



## Don M. (Nov 16, 2015)

Lon said:


> I personally would like to see more outrage expressed by so called Good Muslim Clerics & a discrediting of the so called rewards of Martyrdom which is why Isis members are so willing to die. It's difficult to win any war where your enemy has no concern for their on lives-------



For Sure...I am not aware of any Muslim Cleric, or Islamic leader coming out and publicly condemning these attacks.  The "Good" Muslims....if such really exists....are giving tacit approval to these Jihadists with their Silence.   If a society doesn't discipline or condemn the idiots in its midst, that society can only blame itself when it falls apart.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

Don M. said:


> For Sure...I am not aware of any Muslim Cleric, or Islamic leader coming out and publicly condemning these attacks.  The "Good" Muslims....if such really exists....are giving tacit approval to these Jihadists with their Silence.   If a society doesn't discipline or condemn the idiots in its midst, that society can only blame itself when it falls apart.




Apparently you don't read through these threads...  Outrage WAS expressed by all of the ME leaders.. incuding Iran.   There is a massive outcry on social media by average Muslims called "Not in MY Name"..   where have your been?


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 16, 2015)

Don M. said:


> For Sure...I am not aware of any Muslim Cleric, or Islamic leader coming out and publicly condemning these attacks.  The "Good" Muslims....if such really exists....are giving tacit approval to these Jihadists with their Silence.   If a society doesn't discipline or condemn the idiots in its midst, that society can only blame itself when it falls apart.



Oh right, another one who thinks all 1.5 billion Muslims are terrorists.


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 16, 2015)

I actually know a few "good Muslims," as you put it, and they are as American as the rest of us.  I can assure you they are just as appalled as the rest of us at the carnage in Paris.  The danger is the radicalized nutjobs, not my pharmacist.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

Lon said:


> I personally would like to see more outrage expressed by so called Good Muslim Clerics & a discrediting of the so called rewards of Martyrdom which is why Isis members are so willing to die. It's difficult to win any war where your enemy has no concern for their on lives-------



http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/20...ps-speak-out-against-terror-attacks-in-paris/

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=81A61C5E30740E436B4681A61C5E30740E436B46


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 16, 2015)

Don M. said:


> For Sure...I am not aware of any Muslim Cleric, or Islamic leader coming out and publicly condemning these attacks.  The "Good" Muslims....if such really exists....are giving tacit approval to these Jihadists with their Silence.   If a society doesn't discipline or condemn the idiots in its midst, that society can only blame itself when it falls apart.



Of course good Muslims exist, here are some that are publicly speaking out.  More here. 


US Muslim Groups Stand Together To Denounce The Paris Terrorist Attacks

A coalition of eight leading U.S. Muslim organizations held a Saturday press conference in Washington D.C. to denounce the horrific Paris terrorist attacks that killed over 120 people. The U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) released a press statement on Saturday condemning the acts of terror. The statement read:

"The US Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), a coalition of leading national and local Muslim organizations, strongly condemns the abhorrent terror attacks that took place yesterday in Paris and left over 150 innocent people dead and scores injured. USCMO stands consistent with its position against all forms of violence against innocent people anywhere in Turkey, Beirut, Syria, Paris, and on our soil irrespective of the perpetrators, targets, or reasons. These repugnant acts of violence defy the sanctity of every innocent human live and shall always be condemned and rejected.

​The US Council of Muslim Organizations sends its heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims and to the people of France and stands in solidarity with them against terrorism and violent extremism. We ask the American Muslim community around the nation to hold candle light vigils in memory of the victims and in support of their families."


​The USCMO coalition includes representatives from eight different Islamic organizations–the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), American Muslims for Palestine, Islamic Circle of North America, Muslim Alliance in North America, Muslim American Society, Muslim Legal Fund of America, Muslim Ummah of North America, and the Mosque Cares.

CAIR, the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy group in the nation, also released a separate statement, saying:

These savage and despicable attacks on civilians, whether they occur in Paris, Beirut or any other city, are outrageous and without justification. We condemn these horrific crimes in the strongest terms possible. The perpetrators of these heinous attacks must be apprehended and brought to justice.


​Many Muslim leaders in the United States are speaking out and standing with the people of Paris in these tumultuous times. Their voices may go unnoticed amidst the chaos, but they are speaking out against the terrorists who are committing crimes against humanity, and perverting the teachings of Islam to justify their murderous acts.


----------



## Ameriscot (Nov 16, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...i-am-a-muslim-paris-attacks-social-media.html

https://upvoted.com/2015/11/14/muslims-around-the-world-speak-out-against-paris-attacks/


----------



## BobF (Nov 16, 2015)

SeaBreeze said:


> Of course good Muslims exist, here are some that are publicly speaking out.  More here.
> 
> 
> US Muslim Groups Stand Together To Denounce The Paris Terrorist Attacks
> ...



Could we blame our news casters for not making these items more obvious.


----------



## Don M. (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Apparently you don't read through these threads...  Outrage WAS expressed by all of the ME leaders.. incuding Iran.   There is a massive outcry on social media by average Muslims called "Not in MY Name"..   where have your been?



Oh, I'm sure that there have been some "statements" from Muslim leaders, but I haven't seen anything on the major news outlets...Network or Cable...where these "leaders" have come out against these acts.  And....most days I don't have hours to pour through Every Post on these Internet forums, and I Certainly don't waste my time on social media...fortunately, I still have a life, and gobs of things to do nearly every day.  It is only because its really rainy today, that I am spending more than 15 minutes here.  

Making a "Statement" is one thing....actually doing something about it is quite another.  If these "leaders" were really serious about improving their societies image, they would be rounding up the misfits in their midst, and prosecuting them.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 16, 2015)

BobF said:


> Could we blame our news casters for not making these items more obvious.



I think we could, many of them sell fear to the public for ratings and political gain, so voluntarily announcing these things on news reports would not suit their agenda, IMO.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

Fox won't show it..

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/01/07/what-fox-wont-show-you-muslim-leaders-are-conde/202049

Fox figures have falsely suggested the Muslim community has not condemned the terror attack on the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France despite the fact that Muslim leaders, advocacy groups and organizations, and leaders of Arab states have roundly denounced the attacks -- a fact that Fox reported on its website, but left off air.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 16, 2015)

There is a lot of defiant talking from leaders. The first test of courage is a determination to still hold all of the international events planned for this month. I am sure that there will be a lot of informal talking going on behind the scenes. One thing that must not happen is a demonising of the Muslim communities already living among us. 

What we decide to do militarily should be very carefully considered to avoid  making the same mistakes we have made in the past. To wage a successful war it is necessary to have a good idea of what the objectives are, to really know the enemy and their weaknesses and strengths and to plan for the time when the war is over, to rebuild and support the war zone else a new enemy arise in the vacuum that is created. We must not create another post Hussein Iraq or a post Gaddafi Libya.

Here are a couple examples of leaders talking tough. I don't believe that they really know what should come next



> *We will destroy this organisation’
> 
> *French president Francois Hollande has issued a rallying cry for a war against Islamic State to eradict terrorism.
> Addressing the Congrès des Parliamentaires — a meeting of both houses of parliament, Mr Hollande called for ‘’more strikes, more support, there needs a coming together of those who can really combat this terrorist army’’.
> ...


----------



## Fern (Nov 16, 2015)

France has acknowledged that they have raided several homes of known Jihadi 'groups' who preach infidel hatred. I would suggest that other countries who know of these groups,do the same. Forget about PCness and free speech at a time like this.


----------



## chic (Nov 16, 2015)

hollydolly said:


> Today they have allegedly issued a threat saying that Washington is Next...
> 
> ISIS has issued a chilling new video warning that countries taking part in air strikes against Syria would suffer the same fate as Paris and claimed they will attack Washington D.C. next.
> The specific threat against the US capital emerged as CIA director John Brennan warned that more atrocities will be committed against the West by the Islamist terror group.
> ...



Yup, I just saw that on CNN's 6 o'clock news. It gave me the creeps. Though it figures the U.S. would be next. Time to blow ISIS of the map asap before they kill any more civilians in *any* country. These people will never stop. And you can't negotiate with a terrorist. So what else is left but war?


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

chic said:


> Yup, I just saw that on CNN's 6 o'clock news. It gave me the creeps. Though it figures the U.S. would be next. Time to blow ISIS of the map asap before they kill any more civilians in *any* country. These people will never stop. And you can't negotiate with a terrorist. So what else is left but war?




Blow them off WHAT map??  They are not in one place... they are everywhere... They are already in every country.. How do you find them and kill them?


----------



## Jackie22 (Nov 16, 2015)

[h=1]All Paris Attackers Identified So Far Are European Nationals, According To Top EU Official.[/h]All of the attackers from Friday’s massacre in Paris so far have been identified as European Union nationals, according to a top EU official. The announcement further casts doubt on the validity of a Syrian passport found near the bodies of a slain attacker. 
“Let me underline, the profile of the terrorists so far identified tells us this is an internal threat,” Federica Mogherini, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, said after a meeting with EU foreign ministers. “It is all EU citizens so far. This can change with the hours, but so far it is quite clear it is an issue of internal domestic security.” 

The majority of attackers were identified as French or Belgian nationals. An Egyptian passport was also found, but the Egyptian Ambassador to France said it belonged to a critically wounded victim and not a perpetrator. The Syrian passport caused a ruckus, with some politicians in Europe and the U.S. calling for a halt to Syrian refugee resettlement. An increasing number of state governors are trying to defund the settlement program. American officials told CBS News that the passport might be fake, while British-daily the Independent reported that a man was arrested in Serbia while carrying a Syrian passport with matching details to the one found in Paris. 

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015...opean-nationals-according-to-top-eu-official/


----------



## fureverywhere (Nov 16, 2015)

You know you can't freak out about it...who expected Boston and how could we have prevented that? Any "soft targets" are in danger. I breathe a sigh of relief if they get through New Year's in Time Square every year.


----------



## Bobw235 (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> what difference does THAT make..  The fact that people would have had to
> 
> 1. Instantly assess what was happening, when even the band member didn't know and kept right on playing after the 1st shots.
> 
> ...



This is a bit lengthy, but worth watching as it supports your contention.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 16, 2015)

That is a very valuable video, Bob.

I'm in the hide and play dead camp.
I can't see that I would have any better option.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 16, 2015)

So as I said.. imagine a dark room people busy watching a band... and gun shots..  The people in the video knew exactly what was happening, but people in that Paris music venue didn't... Armed people would have been useless...


----------



## Bobw235 (Nov 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> So as I said.. imagine a dark room people busy watching a band... and gun shots..  The people in the video knew exactly what was happening, but people in that Paris music venue didn't... Armed people would have been useless...



While this video will never change a true "concealed carry" advocate, it was a fascinating experiment.  I thought it was interesting that despite the training they had received, the surprise element completely undid all they had learned.  I agree with you that had someone in the concert hall had a gun, they would have been dead as soon as they tried to take a shot.


----------



## fureverywhere (Nov 16, 2015)

No this isn't a frickin' video game, there is no Gawd mode here...


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 17, 2015)

Don M. said:


> In this type of "warfare", conventional tactics are of little value...rather, Information is the most valuable "weapon".  No one really likes to have their private information known, but in this age, we Must be willing to allow the government access to virtually everything, if we are ever going to win this struggle.  After all, it would seem to me that Only Those with Something illegal to Hide, would benefit from "secrecy".  There seems to be a great deal of desire to keep medical records hidden, but I don't understand why.  Who cares if I had a dental crown, or got new glasses this past Summer?  Anything that helps identify a potential Jihadist is OK in my book.



That's just as reactionary as those who want an all out conventional war. And has already proven not to work in many instances including France and Europe who suffered 3 attacks this year alone. There are also reports that various countries and agencies had some of these coward terrorists on a list of some kind which means they already had intelligence which was ignored or improperly handled. One has to remember what they are defending. 

Perhaps increased profiling based on existing information on higher probability 'suspects' including groups for intelligence gathering, not detainment or expulsion.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 17, 2015)

I'm afraid this is a different world.. we are all going to have to accept the fact that our personal privacy may well be sacrificed for keeping us safe..  bitter pill for some, but what is the alternative?


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 17, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I'm afraid this is a different world.. we are all going to have to accept the fact that our personal privacy may well be sacrificed for keeping us safe..  bitter pill for some, but what is the alternative?



It's not a bitter pill that has to be swallowed because wether one dies by terrorist or criminal the threat or potential for murder/death will always be there. There are people living and working in neighborhoods where everyday they are sized up & tested by street thugs, gang bangers and/or common criminal psychopaths. A threat will always be there. More effort needs to go into training and education on surviving on the street when confronted with a shooter, murderer, criminal psycho. Terrorism is basically a motivation even though frequently used as a 'tool'. It could be weapons or duck n cover type training but individuals need to be made capable for their own survival regardless of the label put on the threat.

That doesn't mean intelligence gathering should be ignored either, if more serious threats are aggressively pursued with existing intelligence and methods that could send a message and/or break up the continuity of these cowards efforts.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 17, 2015)

WhatInThe said:


> It's not a bitter pill that has to be swallowed because wether one dies by terrorist or criminal the threat or potential for murder/death will always be there. There are people living and working in neighborhoods where everyday they are sized up & tested by street thugs, gang bangers and/or common criminal psychopaths. A threat will always be there.* More effort needs to go into training and education on surviving on the street when confronted with a shooter, murderer, criminal psycho. Terrorism is basically a motivation even though frequently used as a 'tool'. It could be weapons or duck n cover type training but individuals need to be made capable for their own survival regardless of the label put on the threat.*



So what you are advocating is that every US citizen be trained to use and carry a gun?


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 17, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> So what you are advocating is that every US citizen be trained to use and carry a gun?



Wouldn't hurt. If nothing else it would help people understand the threat better. A perfect example of trained yet unarmed civilians were the Americans who jumped the France train attacker because being familiar with automatic weapons they recognized the shooter had a stoppage/jam with his weapon and there would be time to confront him knowing clearing a stoppage can take time or confound an incompetent shooter. Trained military also understands things like cover, concealment or knowing that things like crawling or rolling could be used as a tool in a tactical situation.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 17, 2015)

It always seems to come around to everyone packing heat as the solution to all world problems.


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 18, 2015)

Who's next? The perpetrators.

http://www.wptv.com/news/world/2-dead-7-arrested-in-raid-targeting-paris-attack-mastermind


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 18, 2015)

Hmmm. Sometimes I really think women should take over the world. So far testosterone-fuelled decision making hasn't worked too well.


----------



## fureverywhere (Nov 18, 2015)

Yes Shalimar, that could have made a big difference historically. If world leaders were all female there'd be some screeching and name calling of course...but probably no wars.


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 18, 2015)

Thanks Fur. There is bellowing and name calling now--and lots of wars!


----------



## Dudewho (Nov 18, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Had a "couple of people" been armed and began shooting... what are the odds that they would shoot one another... Or shoot people running and screaming.   It sounds really Hollywood'ish  to think you could,  in a split second,  determine what was happening.. who the bad guys are.. and who to shoot..  Suppose a "good guy"  was also shooting from the other side of the room...  WHO would YOU shoot?   would you make the correct decision?  Doubtful.   NOW add a few more "good guys"  ALL shooting at any direction they hear shots coming from.   I contend that just as many people would have died in that concert hall.. only some of them at the had of the "good guys".   It's utter NONSENSE to believe it would have made a difference.



There's a reason this never happens at gun shows.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 18, 2015)

Dudewho said:


> There's a reason this never happens at gun shows.



what does that even mean?


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 18, 2015)

I think it means that any terrorist who wanted to attack a gun show would use a suicide vest or a remote controlled bomb.
Although if they were intent on martyrdom then a shootout with automatic weapons would still be an option.
The element of surprise would be on the terrorists side and they would surely get to take out a lot of people before being taken down.


----------



## Lon (Nov 18, 2015)

Given Isis ability to recruit/infiltrate and their proficiency with bombs and weapons I can'help but feel that the next serious attack will be somewhere in the U.S. during the Holiday Season. Despite our securiy precautions we are WIDE OPEN. I certainly hope I am wrong.


----------



## chic (Nov 19, 2015)

They tried to attack Paris again yesterday but their efforts were thwarted. Hitting Paris twice in a matter within a couple of days was a surprise to me, but their target was to be the financial district, so perhaps they felt it would be worth the effort or thay had already planned it before last Friday's attack.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 19, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> I think it means that any terrorist who wanted to attack a gun show would use a suicide vest or a remote controlled bomb.
> Although if they were intent on martyrdom then a shootout with automatic weapons would still be an option.
> The element of surprise would be on the terrorists side and they would surely get to take out a lot of people before being taken down.



I could just see it...  A suicide bomber stands in the middle of a gun show and blows himself up. he doesn't have to worry about being "taken down" because HE is blown to smithereens.  . ALL the people NOT killed by the bomb would pick up a gun and start firing.. because they really didn't know what had just happened...due to the element of surprise..  So THEY would shoot and kill the remaining people not killed by the bomb...   Yeah... brilliant.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 19, 2015)

Lon said:


> Given Isis ability to recruit/infiltrate and their proficiency with bombs and weapons I can'help but feel that the next serious attack will be somewhere in the U.S. during the Holiday Season. Despite our securiy precautions we are WIDE OPEN. I certainly hope I am wrong.



You aren't wrong... but the "WIDE OPEN" remark makes no sense....   How can the police be EVERYWHERE?  They can have an idea that something is about to happen and be vigilant.. but eventually something will happen..


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 19, 2015)

Hmm, the threat will certainly heighten online shopping...


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 19, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> Hmm, the threat will certainly heighten online shopping...



I'm sure many a Terrorist has gotten weapons at a gun show.... and will continue so long as no background checks are required.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 19, 2015)

True, but I was thinking about gifts, but maybe a gun could be found under the tree...


----------



## Misty (Nov 19, 2015)

The new Isis video is stating that New York City is next to be attacked.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 19, 2015)

New York city is ALWAYS next to be attacked..


----------



## BobF (Nov 19, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> New York city is ALWAYS next to be attacked..



Why should any US city, or anywhere else in the world, be attacked?    We need to join with the other nations in getting rid of these folks creating the fleeing mobs that need help.   If we don't those lines will just get longer and longer.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 19, 2015)

why indeed


----------



## Butterfly (Nov 19, 2015)

CBS news is saying that ISIS is developing chemical weapons using factories in some places they control.  Someone said they are working on Sarin (sp.?) gas and that they have already used mustard gas a couple places in the middle east.  This is a very scary prospect.


----------



## Lon (Nov 19, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> You aren't wrong... but the "WIDE OPEN" remark makes no sense....   How can the police be EVERYWHERE?  They can have an idea that something is about to happen and be vigilant.. but eventually something will happen..



The very fact that the police can't be every where does make us wide open. It's not hard to get into this country as you know.


----------



## fureverywhere (Nov 19, 2015)

We were talking about that last night. Look at the Boston Bombing, that caught everybody by surprise, even with tight security.


----------



## hollydolly (Nov 20, 2015)

Armed jihadists have gone on a deadly shooting rampage inside the Radisson Blu hotel in the centre of Bamako, Mali.
Automatic  weapons fire could be heard from outside the 190-room hotel, where two  militants have taken 140 guests and 30 members of staff hostage. 
Witnesses  described hearing at least one explosion coming from the hotel, which  is a popular choice for foreign dignitaries visiting Mali. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hooting-rampage-hotel-Mali.html#ixzz3s1Rc8owB 

​


----------



## Misty (Nov 20, 2015)

Militant says ISIS will turn White House 'black with our fire, Allah willing'
Another extremist also threatens Barack Obama and Francois Hollande
Says ISIS will lead America, France and their allies 'like slaves, like dogs'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ideo-threaten-America-days.html#ixzz3s2a4qXMe 

Another threat against France and the White House, but no threats have been personally issued to Russia, and they are fighting against Isis too.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 20, 2015)

Actually to date Russia has claimed to be fighting ISIS but has mainly confined  air strikes to the rebels fighting against Assad. They did take down a Russian civilian plane which seems to have caused Putin to rethink his strategy.


----------



## Misty (Nov 20, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Actually to date Russia has claimed to be fighting ISIS but has mainly confined  air strikes to the rebels fighting against Assad. They did take down a Russian civilian plane which seems to have caused Putin to rethink his strategy.



Thanks for the info, Warrigal. As you mentioned Russia has definitely changed their strategy since the bombing of their plane and so far they have accomplished a significant amount of damage against isis, so was surprised Russia was not mentioned  personally in today's Isis attack threat video.


----------

