The all purpose terrorism thread featuring plenty of allah akbar

[Rockstar]

Been reading Kuznetsov's power plant specs. Stuff like that hasn't been seen in a modern navy since the 60's. I guess it wasnt really designed to project power abroad like U.S. carriers are though so effeciency probably not much of a concern. Sources did say that it was scheduled to come out fighting between 2017 and 2020 with either gas turbines or a nuclear power plant. But I tellya if government contract work in Russia is anything like what we have here in the U.S. it would probably be cheaper to invest in a new ship.

[Oberon]

You mean the black smoke?

It was the result of the boilers working in a non optimal mode. The current boilers on Kuznetsov use a hydrolic automatic control system, but that system is dead, so they are manually switched into a small number of narrow performance modes.

For obvious reasons those are optimised for the full power burns, meaning that at lower power settings the boilers loose efficiency and you get a lot of smoke.

(plus we use fuel oil aka mazut vs diesel)

Is a power supply upgrade (or at least full overhaul) planned for the refit?

[ikalugin]

^ Skybird meant that Russia does not seem to partake in action against syrian Rebels, Kurds and terrorists like Daesh anymore, instead of finishing the 'job'.
He did not doubt Russia would stay to build and use some infrastructure in Syria for future russian military operations.
And I said that we are not actually leaving but rather rotating. Which means that we would keep conducting operations against the various rebels.

Been reading Kuznetsov's power plant specs. Stuff like that hasn't been seen in a modern navy since the 60's. I guess it wasnt really designed to project power abroad like U.S. carriers are though so effeciency probably not much of a concern. Sources did say that it was scheduled to come out fighting between 2017 and 2020 with either gas turbines or a nuclear power plant. But I tellya if government contract work in Russia is anything like what we have here in the U.S. it would probably be cheaper to invest in a new ship.
The control system for boilers is bust and we no longer have the skills to repair/maintain it b/c USSR went bust. Chinese just replaced the boilers alltogether. There are a lot of other things that piled up since it was accepted into service and I hope that they would all get fixed during the midlife repair.

Is a power supply upgrade (or at least full overhaul) planned for the refit?
I don't remember seeing any official orders for it, but I would assume that we would change the boilers and do a lot of other work on Kuznetsov.

[Rockstar]

Cool video of su-33s operating from the Kuznetsov. Noticed they are as we say in the maritime field 'light ship' (I dont know what a brown shoe calls it). With the future new air wing planned gonna need EMAL or steam catapults to get those wings loaded for ground attack off the deck.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qa2E6X-xnnw

[ikalugin]

There were flights of Su33s with strike weapons from Kuznetsov. But, yea, there were plenty of unarmed training flights as well.

[Rockstar]

Sorry didn't meant to imply Kuznetsov's aircraft didnt fly without munitions in Syria but the design of the launch system does severely limit the amount they can carry. I was just saying if they are as some say going to put a more capable aircraft aboard after a refit. That refit would need to include catapult system to get an aircraft with say a 15,000 pound payload of hurt off that ship. I could be wrong but I dont think a ramp launch allows such things to happen. Plus the ability to carry more gives those poor pilots a break not having to fly so many sorties. :)

It will be interesting to see what they come up with for a refit.

[ikalugin]

You can take off with maximum payload (to be more precise the aircraft with the maximum take off mass can take off) from the 3rd launch position.

This means that catapults do not increase the maximum take off mass, what they do is:
- allow simultaneous take offs and landings (provided your carrier is big enough).
- allow more take offs/unit of time.
While those things are usefull, they can be exploited only if you operate with a high tempo, which is not happening with Kuznetsov for various reasons.

[Rockstar]

Weight certainly does affect the speed of an aircraft. The heavier it is the longer the run needed during take off. If an aircraft cant reach that minimum speed necessary from a carrier its gonna go for swim. An F-18 Super Hornet with say 12,000 pounds of ordinance is not going anywhere with a run up distance and a jump ramp the size of the Kuznetzov. I dont know what the max load it is for Mig-29 is. If its anything like a Super Hornet I'll bet money its gonna need more than position 3 on the Kuznetsov's flight deck to get up in the air. Then again maybe the poor Mig-29 is whimpy and cant carry anything heavy like the F-18. :03:

[eddie]

Reports coming in that the Iraqi's have retaken the east side of Mosul now, they just might pull the whole thing off!

[Jimbuna]

Weight certainly does affect the speed of an aircraft. The heavier it is the longer the run needed during take off. If an aircraft cant reach that minimum speed necessary from a carrier its gonna go for swim. An F-18 Super Hornet with say 12,000 pounds of ordinance is not going anywhere with a run up distance and a jump ramp the size of the Kuznetzov. I dont know what the max load it is for Mig-29 is. If its anything like a Super Hornet I'll bet money its gonna need more than position 3 on the Kuznetsov's flight deck to get up in the air. Then again maybe the poor Mig-29 is whimpy and cant carry anything heavy like the F-18. :03:

Mig-29

Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
Loaded weight: 15,300 kg (33,730 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 20,000 kg (44,100 lb)

F-18

Empty weight: 23,000 lb (10,400 kg)
Loaded weight: 36,970 lb (16,770 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 51,900 lb (23,500 kg)

[Jimbuna]

Reports coming in that the Iraqi's have retaken the east side of Mosul now, they just might pull the whole thing off!

Looking that way Eddie :yep:

Mosul battle: Iraqi army prepares offensive on west of city

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38664607

[ikalugin]

Weight certainly does affect the speed of an aircraft. The heavier it is the longer the run needed during take off. If an aircraft cant reach that minimum speed necessary from a carrier its gonna go for swim. An F-18 Super Hornet with say 12,000 pounds of ordinance is not going anywhere with a run up distance and a jump ramp the size of the Kuznetzov. I dont know what the max load it is for Mig-29 is. If its anything like a Super Hornet I'll bet money its gonna need more than position 3 on the Kuznetsov's flight deck to get up in the air. Then again maybe the poor Mig-29 is whimpy and cant carry anything heavy like the F-18. :03:
The point is that both Su33 and MiG29K/KUB can take off with their maximum take off mass from Kuznetsov's 3rd position (though assuming normal operational conditions, such as moving carrier).

Here is one of the open sources based estimates regarding the Su33:
https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/47043/227305704.20/0_13ada4_e9c4b15_orig
Translation of the table's contents would be horizontally:
(combat load composition) ( combat load mass) (fuel mass) (mass of combat load and fuel) (take off mass) (combat radius) (take off position)

and vertically:
(2*R27ET+2*R73) (8*R27ET+4*R73) (2*R27ET+2*R73) (8*R27ET+4*R73) (28*FAB250) (26*FAB250+4*R73) (20*FAB250+4*R73) (2*3M55+6*R73)

Declaimer - even though we have not seen 3M55 being used on the Su33 we did not know about the Kh31 series integration either untill we saw it on the Kuznetsov last year.

[ikalugin]

Mig-29

Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
Loaded weight: 15,300 kg (33,730 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 20,000 kg (44,100 lb)

F-18

Empty weight: 23,000 lb (10,400 kg)
Loaded weight: 36,970 lb (16,770 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 51,900 lb (23,500 kg)
I think you are misleading with your figures, as both the MiG29 and F18 have variants. MiG29K/KUB (which also had a lot of variants) was (and is) heavier than the original MiG29 (the 9-12 model).
The most obvious is the change in the fuel load - 9-12 didnt really have much in terms of fuel.

http://www.uacrussia.ru/ru/aircraft/lineup/military/mig-29k-kub/aircraft-specific/
The official website here provides the mass data:
normal take off mass - 18550kgs.
max take off mass - 24500kgs.

p.s. I can link and translate an article regarding the Kuznetsov's airgroup and it's potential if people are interested.

[ikalugin]

A topic that makes me curious is where all Tochka-U systems went. We have been rearming missile brigades from Tochka/Tochka-R/Tochka-U systems to Iskander-M systems, freeing a lot of Tochka/Tochka-R/Tochka-U systems.

However I have not seen any contracts or even programs for decomissioning the Tochkas, which is suspicious especially considering that a lot of the missiles are not beyond their use by date.

Hence I wonder - where did they go? Would we see a sudden surge in Tochka usage in some conflict around the world?

p.s. This is interesting because TBMs become increasingly common, yet we have not seen them in wars betwenn matching oponents. In my opinion it would be interesting to see that, as it may provide insight into how important tactical/operational BMD is on the modern battlefield.

Here would can see the (old, Cold War era) table for Tochka-U effects:
http://militaryrussia.ru/i/284/191/Y22pL.gif
Table reads, horizontaly:
accuracy for determining target's position (for the 9M79K missile with cluster warhead and 9M79Ф missile with unitary HE FRAG per each accuracy rating)
vertically:
missile launcher on position (destruction)
Lance battery
battery of non armoured SP artillery or towed artillery
command posts (various)
more commands posts
Nike-Hercules battery
Hawk battery or Chapparel-Vulcan platoon
helicopters on pads
ammunition and fuel warehouses
manpower, unarmoured vehicles, aircraft, area of target 20 acres
area of target 40 acres
area of target 60 acres
area of target 100 acres

[August]

My guess would be either Syria or Iran or both.

[ikalugin]

My guess would be either Syria or Iran or both.
Both are Tochka operators, but why not include Yemen and Donbas?

I mean we are talking here about 100-140 launchers. If you look at the above table you could see that you need 1-2 missiles per target if you can get the target's coordinates with 50m mistake or less (which is not hard with today's navigation and C&C). This can translate for example into attack against ~100 artillery battery or CP type targets in a salvo, which is a lot.

p.s. as an example (declaimer - this is very innacurate and approximate). Lets say that the enemy has a light corps type formation (this is entirely hypothetical) with 2 divisions, each with 4 manuever brigades and 1 artillery brigade. Then lets assume that you have a high power artillery battalion, helicopter and a SAM brigade under the corps command.

This gives us (for eastern patern OOB, TO&E) an approx target set of:
15 artillery battalions of 45 batteries.
16 unit CPs (brigades, detached batalions and above).
16 SAM units (8 short and 8 medium range).
Which means that with ~100 launchers that target force can be decapitated using one unit of fire (missiles on the launchers and organic transports for the missile brigade set) even if we add 1/3 certainty of aiming at the right targets.

[August]

Both are Tochka operators, but why not include Yemen and Donbas?

Indeed, or even some non state entity like Hezbollah.

[mapuc]

The Danish Parliament have earlier today increased the military mandate. The Special forces from Denmark who is currently doing some military operation of some kind in Iraq have now the right to enter Syria and engage ISIS there too.

Markus

[ikalugin]

Russia-Syria agreement went into it's legal power.

Basically we got full rights on Tartus and extraterritorial status for it.

[ikalugin]

http://diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/209276.html
Russian cargo planes and helicopters bring reinforcements to the isolated SAA pocket.

Enemy (ISIS) forces are quite close by to the airfield, I guess the institutional skills of Afghan war didn't go away after all.

[Oberon]

Russian Defence Ministry has stated that its warplanes have flown first combat missions in Syria with US-led coalition aircraft.

[ikalugin]

Russian Defence Ministry has stated that its warplanes have flown first combat missions in Syria with US-led coalition aircraft.
Yes, we also did some sorties with Turks before.

[Oberon]

Now the question is...which one is the truth and which one is an Alternative Fact™?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C24BQKoVEAAx8ya.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C24BQKsUQAAmRcn.jpg

:k_confused:

[August]

Now the question is...which one is the truth and which one is an Alternative Fact™?
:k_confused:

Both are true.

In accordance with agreements the US tells Russia they will be dropping ordinance at a particular spot. Russia figures out the likely target and also attacks it. The US didn't try to coordinate the strikes just inform Russia where they would be operating. Russia sees a propaganda opportunity. You fall for it.

[Skybird]

Since somebody recently asked me in another thread by whom Germany should feel threatened so that it should maintain military strength.

CNN recently reported that several strikes against IS camps and personell carried out in Libya by the US Air Force, were run due to attempts of targetting and killing contact persons of the Syrian assassin who murdered several people on the christmas market in Berlin 2016.

I have to wonder. The terror attack was carried out on German soil, in a German city, during a German festivity, killing German citizens and injuring, mutilating, traumatising German citizens - subjects which to protect from such dangers is a mandatory constitutional duty of the German state. Why is it then that it needs American platforms firing American ordinance and putting American crews at risk in retaliation for this anti-German attack, when in fact it should have been German military capacities reaching out and retaliating for the terror attack from Berlin? Isn'T Germany seen as one of the leading, most wealthy nations on Earth? Why do we not maintain a more potential military? Just this third world aid and development unit that it currently is?

A classic joke from the cold war era: whats the role of the west-German Bundeswehr in case the Sovjets suddenly attack? To regulate traffic and keep the Autobahn free for the real armies (US, UK) arriving as relief forces.

[ikalugin]

Cold War Era Bundeswehr was a credible force to be reckoned with, especially on the tactical level. So is the current Bundeswehr force, on paper atleast.

What, in my opinion, Bunderswehr needs (well apart from EU becoming a centralised federal state with a single army, which you would not approve of) is to improve what it already has - improve readiness and combat preperadnes.

[Oberon]

(well apart from EU becoming a centralised federal state with a single army, which you would not approve of)

If that would happen Europe would be a potent force...but it probably never will.




Meanwhile in the Middle East, 17-20 million Shia Muslims stick two fingers up at Daesh and march to Karbala.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/20-million-muslims-march-against-isis-arbaeen-pilgrimage-iraq-karbala-a7436561.html

[Oberon]

Uncle Kuznetsov is heading through the channel, wondered why it was so foggy tonight. He's brought the usual guests with him, a Royal Navy warship which wishes it was HMS Ocean (Transmitting the wrong transponder), HNOMS Roald Amundsen, and the HNLMS Groningen. A USN P-8A also buzzed the Kuzzie at 500ft about 15-20 minutes ago whilst doing 210kts.
Hopefully the weather will be clear and there'll be some nice pics as he goes around Hellfire corner. :salute:

[Dan D]

[...]
What, in my opinion, Bunderswehr needs [ ...] to improve what it already has - improve readiness and combat preperadnes.

The German-Dutch Corps for example would be a quick response unit for both NATO and EU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._German/Dutch_Corps

[Skybird]

NATO states are - rightly - demanded by Trump to finally fulfill their financial self-committments. The only ones doing that or exceeding them even, are the Brits and I think the French (on the latter I am not certain).

Now that the crisis-haunted EU desperately seeks a new "symbol" that should communicate how very nicely united and fine they all are LOL, the Euro military united super corps has been discovered, and new military structures should be formed for that. Of course, the eU then gets a new ministry to boast with, the Euzropean defence council/ministry/party club or whatever you want to call it. Nice meetins with cool drinks and attrac9tve ladies serving drinks, and nice PR photos and invitations for TV talkshows. For politicians, this sounds all great of course.

But why having parallel structures to the already established ones - NATO's?

Why risking political controversy if NATO decides for one thing, and the Euro military orginsation decides for an opposing thing?

Why to assume that the money this new structure and network will cost, will be paid willingly - if states demonstrate that they are not even willing to fulfill their financial obligations within NATO?

Why assuming that adding to the hierarchy to decision-making and political will forming, will form better, faster reacting, more potent reaction options in case of a sudden crisis? The German-Dutch corps requires 30 days minimum as pre-warning time in case of emergency deploymment - on paper. Remember how fast thigns rushed in parts on the nCrimean peninsula ince the first green men were spotted. I know from insiders (the logistical and staff headquarter is stationed here in my hometown Münster) from years ago that internally they calculate - at least years ago - with more time before they are able to relocate and setup a "robust" and really combat-potent force somewhere in Eastern or Southern Europe. Symbolically raisng a flag somewhere or sending a groupo to repair a bridge or drill a waterhole (traditionally the main reason the Bundeswehr now exists, it sometimes seems to me), is one thing, and politicians love it. Setting up a real battle-potent combat forces of serious size somewhere and establishing its logistical support background - that is something very different.

The deficits of the Bundeswerhr lie in eroding platform pools, undersupply on every level, not sufficient personell, low moral and high level of frustration, and time and again: too low numbers in weapon platforms in case of a real conflict with Russia. Helicopters, transportplanes, tanks, navy units and especially their crews - too few, to little, too broken, not enough, not workable, not equipped for combat.

Finally, instead of avoiding symbolically wanted, politically ambitioned, practically questionable double structures that in the end are nothing but additionally wasting money for smaller Bang, the ending of underfunding NATO should be the priority. This way, the Europeans could also claim a bigger role in NATO rightfully, and either demand America to reduce its claims for control and power in it, or could fill any vacancies if Trump voluntarily reduces America'S role in NATO, as he has threatened to do. Lets face it: Americas priority is no longer Europe, or the Middle East - but the Pacific.

This is the far more potent and clever move to make. And that is why Russia supports the idea of secondary European military structures instead. The more difficult and complex the network of hierarchies in Europe is, the easier it is for Russia to manipulate it in its favour and to win the media war - and delay (at least, if not more) real military reactions.

We have an established military defence structure already. Why forming parallel structures? We should spend more for NATO, and by that strengthen European positions inside NATO instead - and by that strengthening our stand and influence in it, compared to Washington. Right now, without Washingtons Yes or No nothing works in NATO. And this although the EU economic zone has a slightly higher GDP than the American economy...!? A parallel military structure will suffer from the same financial harms: it will be underfunded, and if not, this would mean that the force is so small that militarily it has no real importance and effect in case of a major conflict. And what then? Calling NATO for help?

Not two alliances parallel to each other, like Moscow wants (Moscow acts by divide et impera here). Only one alliance - but this one in much better shape, if you please.

[ikalugin]

The German-Dutch Corps for example would be a quick response unit for both NATO and EU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._German/Dutch_Corps
I was talking about overall readiness and preparedness. Quick response units are, in my opinion, a placebo.

[Oberon]

Just saw some footage from a helo and Typhoon passing over the Kuznetsov in the channel earlier today, her funnel smoke seems a lot less thicker than it was on her way out to Syria. They fix or change something out there? :hmmm:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38745364

[mapuc]

Some news from our politician on the home front

The are two parties who's debating on who are the biggest threat to Denmark.

The Conservative party say it's Russia, while the Peoples party say it's Islamic/ISIS that is the biggest threat to Denmark.

Both party agree on that Russia/ISIS is a threat too, but not so much as what they claim to be the major threat to Denmark.

Markus

[Skybird]

Just saw some footage from a helo and Typhoon passing over the Kuznetsov in the channel earlier today, her funnel smoke seems a lot less thicker than it was on her way out to Syria. They fix or change something out there? :hmmm:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38745364

While the Typhoons do not have any anti-ship missiles they can use their sensors to try to detect the Russian's air defence systems.:dead:

How - helpful in case of a problem. Hasn't a famous Brit once written "Readiness is all", and another one being the author of this quote "Its better to have a weapon and not needing it, than to need a weapon but finding one has none?"

So reassuring that Europe has such a fantastic recent record to forsee and be fully prepared for the many Black Swan events there have been in the past three years and that all failed to take Europe by surprise.

[Oberon]

Well, that would be why there was a warship there too. :03:

Of course, chances are that this also had no missiles, but a strongly worded letter would suffice. :yeah:

[Schroeder]

Of course, chances are that this also had no missiles, but a strongly worded letter would suffice. :yeah:
No, that would hurt feelings and the Russians have declared the Channel (and all other water bodies for that matter) as their safe space, so you can't send them antagonizing letters there.:know:

[Skybird]

Well, that would be why there was a warship there too. :03:

Of course, chances are that this also had no missiles, but a strongly worded letter would suffice. :yeah:
One frigate against the heaviest Missile Cruiser, a Kirov class, that was ever built?

Lousy idea. Kirovs excel in fleet protection, thats what they were build for.

[Jimbuna]

Well, that would be why there was a warship there too. :03:

Of course, chances are that this also had no missiles, but a strongly worded letter would suffice. :yeah:

May well have been something lurking nearby underneath the surface :03:

[ikalugin]

May well have been something lurking nearby underneath the surface :03:
The issue there is that the reported Kuznetsov's submerged escorts sort of outnumber the RN in that category.

To be more specific - Kuznetsov group, reportedly, was reinforced with 2 Oscar-II class SSGNs and 2 Akula class SSNs. Unless RN both 1) surged more than 2/3 of it's SSNs and 2) concentrated them totally against Kuznetsov grouping then, chances are, they were outnumbered in that respect as well.

p.s. Both Kuznetsov and Peter the Great have soft/hard kill counter torpedo system.

[Oberon]

Submarines in the channel? I doubt it, too much traffic, too much wreckage and not enough play room. Anyone who has done the run through Der kanal in any Silent Hunter game can tell you that. Chances are the escorts have probably sprinted around Scotland and will meet up in the North Sea.

In the unlikely event that anything happened there, well...they're slap bang between French and Dutch forces on one side and British forces on the other.
Even with our depleted forces, the group would not make it into the North Sea.

It's all just the usual posturing.

[ikalugin]

Much bigger issue than any surface or subsurface combatants would be the land based air power. Becuase I don't see French or Dutch armadas the same way I don't see the RN ones. (plus those Granits on Oscar-IIs really do have some good range)

[Jimbuna]

Submarines in the channel? I doubt it, too much traffic, too much wreckage and not enough play room. Anyone who has done the run through Der kanal in any Silent Hunter game can tell you that. Chances are the escorts have probably sprinted around Scotland and will meet up in the North Sea.

In the unlikely event that anything happened there, well...they're slap bang between French and Dutch forces on one side and British forces on the other.
Even with our depleted forces, the group would not make it into the North Sea.

It's all just the usual posturing.

Rgr that and take comfort in the fact the odds are, had such assets been deployed, those belonging to the west are more likely to be the ones that remained undetected.

[eddie]

Gunmen open fire on mosque in Canada, kill 6 and wounded 8. Glad they caught the gunmen too!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/five-dead-in-quebec-city-mosque-shooting-mosque-president/ar-AAmof9J

[Catfish]

Trump's next move: Ban all Canadians from the US!

Seriously, this kind of action will be a problem. As soon as some prominent figure like Trump publicly advocates the opinion of a minority who did not dare to speak this out loud before, the latter now feels encouraged to act in the same alleged [!] tenor.
At least we have seen this in Europe, with Marine lePen, Victor Orban and so forth.

[Jimbuna]

Gunmen open fire on mosque in Canada, kill 6 and wounded 8. Glad they caught the gunmen too!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/five-dead-in-quebec-city-mosque-shooting-mosque-president/ar-AAmof9J

Tragic and senseless :nope:

Trump's next move: Ban all Canadians from the US!

Seriously, this kind of action will be a problem. As soon as some prominent figure like Trump publicly advocates the opinion of a minority who did not dare to speak this out loud before, the latter now feels encouraged to act in the same alleged [!] tenor.
At least we have seen this in Europe, with Marine lePen, Victor Orban and so forth.

True that and becoming increasingly worrying.

[Rockstar]

What a knee jerk reaction. To insinuate this shooting had something to do with what Trump has said or done just goes to show you haven't bothered to read the article. Also just because you havent heard about problems in Canada until now doesnt mean they never exsisted. Which had you bothered reading the article you would have found this has been an increasing problem in Canada many years before Trump took office.

I know. But Trump derp derp derp!

[August]

What a knee jerk reaction. Trying to insinutae this shooting had something to do with what Trump has said or done just goes to show you haven't bothered to read the article. Also because you dont hear about problems in Canada doesnt mean they dont exist. Which had you bothered reading the article would have found this has been an increasing problem years before Trump took office.

But Trump derp derp derp

Yeah the liberals are desperate for something, anything they can use to attack Trump.

[Rockstar]

Its not political groups per se its the unreasonable and idiotic seesaw of extremes. Its like the light of common sense and reason has been extingushed only to be replaced with dim wits and obsessive fanaticism.

[Bilge_Rat]

I live in Quebec.

Doubtful this shooting had anything to do with Trump. Most Quebecers are very liberal and have no use for Trump's policies.

Still too early to know what happened, although the shooters have been identified, one was from Morocco.

Many of the Muslims who frequented the Mosque worked at Laval University and seems the two shooters were students there, so there may be a link.

[Rockstar]

From Morocco? I havent heard that yet but it might explain one witness report I read "They started to fire, and as they shot, they yelled, 'Allahu akbar!'". Maybe the shooters didnt think the professors were true muslims anymore, you know having been swayed by the evils of western society such as education, prosperity and freedom. :nope:

hell who knows, like ya said still too early.

ya but Trump derp derp derp

[Catfish]

Its not political groups per se its the unreasonable and idiotic seesaw of extremes. Its like the light of common sense and reason has been extingushed only to be replaced with dim wits and obsessive fanaticism.

You don't say!
Let me explain this to you: If someone blames the deeds of some idiot terrorists on whole populations or countries, and denies all (!) of them entering or living in the US, why shouldn't he then deny it to the Canadians, when one of them is a terrorist?

Also that:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2461939&postcount=894

and that
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2461944&postcount=895

So the terrorists came from countries that mostly do not belong to the banned ones, and the first link probably explains why.

And yes i know it was an exaggeration, and it was meant just so.

[Rockstar]

What is your arguement? When did Trump ban as you say 'all' Muslims from coming into the U.S. ? Last I heard the ban applies to just 7 countries. Canada just as Saudi Arabia and others are not on the list. Muslims coming from those countries may still legally enter. The situation in Canada is Canadas problem a problem I believe they are more capable of handling. It doesn't have jack squat to do with Trump or U.S. immigration policies.

[Skybird]

On the Canadian terror attack:

Muhammad was a man of violence, war, bloodshed and intimidation. Around 70 wars and predatory raids took place under his rule, by his command. From his young age, to his death.

What kind of ideology basing on his example is reasonable to expect from him - one of peace and equal rights and tolerance, or one of violence, war and intimidation?

Scorpions dont purr. Tigers are no vegetarians. Frogs do not not jump.

If you do not want to sting, this honours you, if you are serious - but why would you want to call yourself a scoprion then? If you are vegetarian, you may be that, but why would you want to claim you are a carnivore then? If you do not jump wide, why would you want to pose as frog then?

[Rockstar]

Seems news reports are saying one suspect is Alexandre Bissonnette a white Canadian from Quebec

[Skybird]

Seems news reports are saying one suspect is a white canadian nationalist nut.
I had little time today, but all news I read this evening now says it were Muslim attackers. Thats what I base my comment above on.

[Bilge_Rat]

so shooter has been I.D.ed, turned out there was only one, the second has been released and is identified as a witness only.

shooter is Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a french speaking Quebecer, student at University Laval.

according to the local paper, he was right-wing, pro-Israel, pro-Trump, anti-immigration. He had also been trolling a pro-immigration forum for the past year.

http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2017/01/30/voici-ce-que-lon-sait-sur-le-suspect-de-la-tuerie-de-la-mosquee

The big question now is how he managed to acquire a AK-47 which is a prohibited firearm (i.e illegal to sell, purchase or own) in Canada.

Before everyone turns this into a "Trump is responsible" issue, Quebec has its own nationalist, anti-muslim fringe which has been around for a long time.

[mapuc]

^ I can not predict the future, I can though, predict the future from this awful shooting.

That is when it comes to our politicians and those with the right attitude in Denmark and Sweden.

It happens every time a rightwing brainless person kills many.

Markus

[Schroeder]

What is your arguement?
The point is that the bans on those countries are arbitrary, stupid and outright racist.

When did Trump ban as you say 'all' Muslims from coming into the U.S. ? Last I heard the ban applies to just 7 countries.
Catfish never said he did. He banned all people of those 7 countries, that's what he said.

The situation in Canada is Canadas problem a problem I believe they are more capable of handling. It doesn't have jack squat to do with Trump or U.S. immigration policies.The logic here is that terror has happened in Canada most likely carried out by a Canadian therefore Trump should put Canada on the list... It's an exaggeration of course just to show how retarded the whole situation is...

[Oberon]

Before everyone turns this into a "Trump is responsible" issue, Quebec has its own nationalist, anti-muslim fringe which has been around for a long time.

Every country has one, and they're getting bigger and stronger.

Should be fun for everyone stuck in the middle. :yeah: :nope:

[Rockstar]

Oh so it was more of an extremist fanboy rant than a rational arguement. Ok I get it now. Thanks

[Onkel Neal]

On the Canadian terror attack:

Muhammad was a man of violence, war, bloodshed and intimidation. Around 70 wars and predatory raids took place under his rule, by his command. From his young age, to his death.

What kind of ideology basing on his example is reasonable to expect from him - one of peace and equal rights and tolerance, or one of violence, war and intimidation?

Scorpions dont purr. Tigers are no vegetarians. Frogs do not not jump.

If you do not want to sting, this honours you, if you are serious - but why would you want to call yourself a scoprion then? If you are vegetarian, you may be that, but why would you want to claim you are a carnivore then? If you do not jump wide, why would you want to pose as frog then?


Wait, the part about the frogs is confusing me....:o

But about the shooting, how did this happen? I mean, gun control.

[Jeff-Groves]

Wait, the part about the frogs is confusing me....:o


From the joke thread I think?

"Finally he chops off the last leg.
He puts the frog on the line and tells it to jump.
"Jump frog, jump!"
The frog doesn’t move.
"Jump frog, jump!"
Again the frog stays on the line.
"Come on frog, jump!"
But to no avail.
The biologist finally writes in his book: "Frog with no legs – goes deaf."

:doh:

[Onkel Neal]

Oh man, ok, got it. :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:

[Jeff-Groves]

Glad you did.
I'm just taking a wild shot in the dark!
:har:

[eddie]

Wait, the part about the frogs is confusing me....:o

But about the shooting, how did this happen? I mean, gun control.

Only know he has been arrested and they are trying to figure out where he got the gun. At least he won't be going anywhere with 6 First Degree murder charges!

[Oberon]

I mean, gun control.

I think the bigger question is why doesn't this happen more often? For example at a rate of over one a day on average? :hmmm: As opposed to, for example, once or twice in a year.

It must be the Tim Hortons, that's it. :yep:

[eddie]

They said (The Canadian Authorities,) That they found this guy had put up a lot of anti-muslim postings on his social network. Is it true he used an AK 47?

[Schroeder]

Oh so it was more of an extremist fanboy rant than a rational arguement. Ok I get it now. Thanks
No, you don't get it but I guess explaining it would be futuile as you clearly don't want to get it....:roll:

[Rockstar]

No, you don't get it but I guess explaining it would be futuile as you clearly don't want to get it....:roll:

ahhh but I do get it.

[August]

The point is that the bans on those countries are arbitrary, stupid and outright racist. ....He banned all people of those 7 countries

Actually Schroeder, Trump only temporarily suspended immigration from those seven countries which Presidents have done in the past and will again in the future. It's not racist or he would have extended it to the other 40 some odd Muslim majority countries, especially the top 5 most populous ones, and made the suspension permanent, which he did not.

It's just a temporary action but the Democrats and their media lapdogs (to borrow Eddies phrase) are desperately looking for something, anything to keep themselves relevant and smear the opposition.

[Rockstar]

Btw temporary in this case is defined as 90 days. Afterwhich legal immigration of those people from the 7 countries on the list will resume.

[Nippelspanner]

It's just a temporary action but the Democrats and their media lapdogs (to borrow Eddies phrase) are desperately looking for something, anything to keep themselves relevant and smear the opposition.

Damn those libtard- treehuggers!
Let us proudly and gladly remember that this despicable course of action would never happen with the Republic...oh wait!

Remember how your new president came to power. By doing nothing but bullying his opposition out of the way, smearing everyone as much as he could, even personal insults you'd expect from a teenager were used in political debates(!)
But hey, let's not be inconvenient, or heavens forbid, even honest for a moment here. ;)

DAMN THEM LIBRALS'!!

[eddie]

It's just a temporary action but the Democrats and their media lapdogs (to borrow Eddies phrase) are desperately looking for something, anything to keep themselves relevant and smear the opposition.


You used the media lapdogs term first August, I just threw it back at you!:haha:

[August]

Damn those libtard- treehuggers!
Let us proudly and gladly remember that this despicable course of action would never happen with the Republic...oh wait!

Remember how your new president came to power. By doing nothing but bullying his opposition out of the way, smearing everyone as much as he could, even personal insults you'd expect from a teenager were used in political debates(!)
But hey, let's not be inconvenient, or heavens forbid, even honest for a moment here. ;)

DAMN THEM LIBRALS'!!

I wouldn't expect you to understand.

[August]

You used the media lapdogs term first August, I just threw it back at you!:haha:

Sorry I must have been channeling my inner democrat. I do live in the deepest of blue states. :)

[Nippelspanner]

I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Next time, at least try. Or don't answer at all. Like usually when you run out of catchphrases.

[August]

Next time, at least try. Or don't answer at all. Like usually when you run out of catchphrases.

Says the guy who uses them all the time but that's ok when you do it right? As for answering you I nearly always do unless real life intrudes or repeating myself gets boring.

[Nippelspanner]

Says the guy who uses them all the time but that's ok when you do it right? As for answering you I nearly always do unless real life intrudes or repeating myself gets boring.

You won't ever realize the hypocrisy in so mamy sentences of yours, will you?
You constantly(!) excuse actions of "your side" (that's your biggest problem right there btw) while you are the first to blame "the other side" for doing the very same, and worse: you generalize like crazy!
For you, it is only ever black and white, them or us, and: "the liberals" as if every liberal person follows some text book of opinions.

That alone shows your complete incapability to participate in any political discussion - unfortunately you still do it, despite being so ignorant towards anything that doesn't go along with any of the derogatory right-wing buzzwords about them evil liberals that you recently picked up and now repeat like a parrot.
But what do I know, I'm just some yuropoor living in chains of oppression because I can't have guns (which I can, btw).

Forget it August, I never bought your crap nor will I now. Unless you'll start to understand that there's no such thing as "the liberals", you are doomed to stay in your little ugly world where everyone who isn't with you, is your enemy.

[Mr Quatro]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/01/30/navy-seal-team-6-members-fought-female-fighters-yemen-raid.html?ESRC=navy_170131.nl

Navy SEAL Team 6 fought and killed female fighters of an al-Qaida affiliate in the raid Saturday in Yemen in which a team member was killed, three were wounded and three injured, the Pentagon said Monday.

"There were a lot of female combatants that were a part of this," Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman, said of the firefight in the raid Saturday, which the Defense Department and White House said killed at least 14 enemy fighters. "Some of those enem[ies] killed in action were female."

[August]

Forget it August, I never bought your crap nor will I now. Unless you'll start to understand that there's no such thing as "the liberals", you are doomed to stay in your little ugly world where everyone who isn't with you, is your enemy.

Whatever. I'm not selling you anything nor would I if you asked. So believe what you want about my country and our people, just don't expect your little anti-us rants will go unanswered. I'm not talking to you as much as I am to others who may read it.

[Nippelspanner]

Whatever. I'm not selling you anything nor would I if you asked. So believe what you want about my country and our people, just don't expect your little anti-us rants will go unanswered. I'm not talking to you as much as I am to others who may read it.

Ah yes. My eternal "anti-us" crusade you think I'm on, just because I don't wave the star spangled banner and accept the blind pathological patriotism that clouds people's minds doesn't mean I am anti-American. That's, as usual, a complete baseless accusation. First, unlike you, I do try not to generalize millions of people, so I am able to differentiate. Second, close friends of mine are Americans and third... There's a slight possibility I might live there someday, not even far from you, but I won't pop your aneurhysm and spare you the details.

Just one thing. Stop the baseless accusations and generalizations please... What was it you recently claimed the evil liberal media is doing, smear campaigns?
Now, what is it you do when you claim nonsense about others?

To make it clear: I am NOT anti-American, I am simply allergic to bs august, that's all.

[August]

To make it clear: I am NOT anti-American, I am simply allergic to bs august, that's all.

Yeah whatever you say... :roll:

[Skybird]

French soldiers shoot machete-swinging Allahuakbar-shouter at Louvre. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38853841

[Oberon]

Looks like a lone nutter this time, glad they nailed him with minimal casualties. Hope the policeman who was injured makes a swift recovery.

[Skybird]

Premier Chazeneuve rates it as a terror attack, saying it was an attack with an obviously terroristic character.

[Jimbuna]

Looks like a lone nutter this time, glad they nailed him with minimal casualties. Hope the policeman who was injured makes a swift recovery.

Could be something or nothing but the article states a second suspect was arrested.

[StdDev]

Remember how your new president came to power. By doing nothing but bullying his opposition out of the way, smearing everyone as much as he could, even personal insults you'd expect from a teenager were used in political debates(!)
But hey, let's not be inconvenient, or heavens forbid, even honest for a moment here. ;)

DAMN THEM LIBRALS'!!

Actually, Trump won the election in spite of this ! The biggest contributor to Trumps victory was the Democratic party.. They decided to back a candidate that many Americans found unacceptable. The presidential election of 2016, for many, came down to a choice between the lesser of evils.... kind of.. it was "Anybody but Hillary" camp vs. the "Anybody but Trump" camp.

Mr. Trump certainly is no orator! and he does indeed seem to come off as a petulant child to many when he speaks.. which does not make him or his intentions wrong (and it certainly does not make him correct either !)

All in all, the present political situation here in the U.S. can be attributed to an aging population... "If you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative when you are old (er) , you have no brains."

[Oberon]

Looks like our machete wielding man was an Egyptian national who'd gotten a tourist visa from Dubai. Needless to say that well spoken intellectual Donald Trump has tweeted about it, saying that the US needs to 'get smart' and "We must keep "evil" out of our country" (his quotation marks around evil, not mine).

I guess it's a good thing that he banned travel from Egypt and Dubai, isn't it? :hmmm:

[Jimbuna]

Looks like our machete wielding man was an Egyptian national who'd gotten a tourist visa from Dubai. Needless to say that well spoken intellectual Donald Trump has tweeted about it, saying that the US needs to 'get smart' and "We must keep "evil" out of our country" (his quotation marks around evil, not mine).

I guess it's a good thing that he banned travel from Egypt and Dubai, isn't it? :hmmm:

Anyone determined to enter a country for 'wrongdoing' purposes will find a way more often than not.

[August]

I guess it's a good thing that he banned travel from Egypt and Dubai, isn't it? :hmmm:

You still refuse to acknowledge the true reasons for the ban and by now you should know better. Why?

[Jimbuna]

You still refuse to acknowledge the true reasons for the ban and by now you should know better. Why?

I was talking to a colleague last night and his question posed to me was "Why weren't Saudi Arabia and Egypt (for example) or quite a few other middle east countries not included? Was it because he has financial interests in those countries?"

I honestly couldn't answer, not being overly interested in the subject matter and therefore not having researched it.

[Oberon]

You still refuse to acknowledge the true reasons for the ban and by now you should know better. Why?

Because it's stupid?

[u crank]

I was talking to a colleague last night and his question posed to me was "Why weren't Saudi Arabia and Egypt (for example) or quite a few other middle east countries not included? Was it because he has financial interests in those countries?"

Because it's stupid?

Possibly......or...

The United States provided $6.5 billion in military assistance to Cairo between 2011 and 2015

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-05-13/what-happened-to-the-billions-in-military-aid-the-us-gave-to-egypt

The Saudi Arabian intervention in Yemen, which began in March 2015, has been aided and abetted from the beginning by the United States. U.S.-supplied military aircraft, refueled by U.S. tanker planes and directed by U.S. intelligence assets, are bombing Yemen almost daily with U.S.-made weapons.

https://warontherocks.com/2016/10/what-a-real-review-of-u-s-military-assistance-to-saudi-arabia-would-say/

A proper review would begin by acknowledging that the sale of U.S. arms to Saudi Arabia is big business. During the span of the Bush and Obama administrations, total U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia increased by nearly 97 percent. The U.S. has offered $115 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia during the Obama administration.

http://securityassistance.org/fact_sheet/just-facts-us-arms-sales-saudi-arabia-0

:hmmm:

[Oberon]

Quite, this whole thing is just a populist move, to make it be seen as though something is being done. Sure, Obama started a vetting list, but he didn't just unilaterally decide to shut down travel from seven nations. Nor did he set himself up for a fall from his own judges by such heavy handed actions.
All of this is just pure propaganda for extremist islamic terrorism groups, it's the perfect recruitment tool, and Daesh must be rubbing their hands in glee at it. Of course, the push-back erodes some of that...but the damage has already been done and will take a while to un-do.
Naturally though, the defenders of the Donald will defend this, because party before country, and so on and so forth, yadda yadda, etc, etc.

[u crank]

Quite, this whole thing is just a populist move, to make it be seen as though something is being done.

I think you are missing my point. Follow the money. It's usually the best explanation. :03:

[Oberon]

I think you are missing my point. Follow the money. It's usually the best explanation. :03:

Well, there's that too. :yep:

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/datadesign/files/2017/02/TravelBan-ConflictsOfInterest-1.jpg

[u crank]

I'm not disputing that Trump has business interests in those countries. I don't think he is either. What I'm saying is that so do many American arms suppliers.

A proper review would begin by acknowledging that the sale of U.S. arms to Saudi Arabia is big business. During the span of the Bush and Obama administrations, total U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia increased by nearly 97 percent. The U.S. has offered $115 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia during the Obama administration. Over the last three years alone — since the start of negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program — America has sold nearly $36 billion in arms to Saudi Arabia. These sales are certainly in the commercial interests of the United States and the American firms that manufacture the weapons. They create jobs, generate corporate profits, and improve the U.S. balance of trade.

Since this increase took place during both the Bush and Obama administrations one can only conclude that both Republicans and Democrats have a vested interest in these dealings. Yea politics.

From Politician by Cream

I support the left, though I'm leaning, leaning to the right.
I support the left, though I'm leaning, leaning to the right.
But I'm not there when it's coming to a fight.

[Oberon]

Oh goodness yes, well BAe has some good deals with the Saudis too, as various people in Yemen are finding out as the bombs that land on them say "Made in Britain". The MIC has some good customers in the region, and come to think of it, aside from Iraq, most of the nations on the list are customers elsewhere...although even Iraq has been buying from Russia lately so that could be part of it.
I'm not sure though how far the MIC has gotten into this administration yet though, considering the make-up of the NSC, so honestly I'd tend to lean more towards Trumps personal business deals taking priority over the likes of Lockheed-Martin.

[MaDef]

Well, there's that too. :yep:

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/datadesign/files/2017/02/TravelBan-ConflictsOfInterest-1.jpgyou're basing your argument on a logical fallacy.

[u crank]

so honestly I'd tend to lean more towards Trumps personal business deals taking priority over the likes of Lockheed-Martin.

OK think what you like. Had the ban included Saudia Arabia a lot more people and money would have been affected than that of Mr. Trumps'. And a lot more blow back.

And then there's this. Don't know how reliable it is but worth a look.

http://egyptianchronicles.blogspot.ca/2017/02/what-we-know-about-trumps-companies-in.html

According to an early Bloomberg report, Trump owns "possibly" in Egypt according to his files in the Federal Election Commission: Trump Marks Egypt and Trump Marks Egypt LLC
I have not heard about them before. No one had heard of them already in Egypt. There is more

An official anonymous source told Youm 7 that both "Trump Marks Egypt" and "Trump Marks Egypt LLC" are not registered at the Egyptian ministry of investment and that there is no company bearing the name "Trump" registered at the ministry in the first place.

The companies are apparently registered in Dover, Delaware.

Oh.:O:

[Takeda Shingen]

OK think what you like. Had the ban included Saudia Arabia a lot more people and money would have been affected than that of Mr. Trumps'. And a lot more blow back.

And then there's this. Don't know how reliable it is but worth a look.

http://egyptianchronicles.blogspot.ca/2017/02/what-we-know-about-trumps-companies-in.html



The companies are apparently registered in Dover, Delaware.

Oh.:O:

So, you read me the riot act and attempted to disembowel me for pointing to an op-ed in the New York Times to elaborate on an opinion, but cite a random blog as factual evidence. S'cute.

[u crank]

So, you read me the riot act and attempted to disembowel me for pointing to an op-ed in the New York Times to elaborate on an opinion, but cite a random blog as factual evidence. S'cute.

Riot act?... attempted to disembowel you? You can't be serious? I merely pointed out the political leanings of a newspaper. And I am not wrong about that. As for Steve Bannon, read our exchange again. I did not disagree with you.

You put me in 'the Trump bubble' without the slightest bit of research. You can search this forum up and down and you will not find one word from me supporting the Presidency of Donald Trump. S'cute indeed.

Also it took me less than a minute to find this.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_de/4424526

[Takeda Shingen]

Riot act?... attempted to disembowel you? You can't be serious? I merely pointed out the political leanings of a newspaper. And I am not wrong about that. As for Steve Bannon, read our exchange again. I did not disagree with you.

You put me in 'the Trump bubble' without the slightest bit of research. You can search this forum up and down and you will not find one word from me supporting the Presidency of Donald Trump. S'cute indeed.

Also it took me less than a minute to find this.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_de/4424526

I don't expect honesty from the bubble, so there's no need to try and scramble to spin your remarks. Just expect me to point dishonesty out.

You have a swell day now.

[u crank]

I don't expect honesty from the bubble, so there's no need to try and scramble to spin your remarks. Just expect me to point dishonesty out.

You have a swell day now.

So that's it? Seems about right.

http://i.imgur.com/b9yoC5o.jpg?2 (http://imgur.com/b9yoC5o)

[Oberon]

Russia got jealous of the US's FUBARed Yemen raid:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38919426

[Skybird]

Thank God it was friendly fire. Not to imagine how Erdoghan again would be fuming by now if it would have been unfriendly fire.

There is too little friendliness amongst people today. Is it so difficult to smile and lose a friendly word when firing a weapon?

[Oberon]

Thank God it was friendly fire. Not to imagine how Erdoghan again would be fuming by now if it would have been unfriendly fire.

There is too little friendliness amongst people today. Is it so difficult to smile and lose a friendly word when firing a weapon?

Indeed, war has become frightfully uncivil. :nope:

[mapuc]

I'm going to use this thread for my comment

In todays Danish news there was an issue about the growing crisis between Turkey and Greece.

Among the Turkish politician one of them said following last week

"Last week threatened the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavasoglu, that "if an accident happens in the confrontations of the Aegean Sea, there is no way back."
Greece sees it as something close to a declaration of war "

Have tried to find an English article about this story

Markus

[August]

Ever accidentally bump into or trip one of your friends? Well this is just the military equivalent.

Murphy's Laws of Combat.

Friendly Fire isnt.
The only thing more accurate than enemy fire is friendly fire.
Anything you do can get you killed including doing nothing.

[Oberon]

I wouldn't worry too much about Turkey and Greece, they've been shooting at each other for years. You should see some of the dogfight HUD videos that either side have released, it's pretty impressive.
Still, we are overdue for a flare-up, Turkey is rotating around the toilet bowl and Greece is somewhere down the U-bend and about to have another debt crisis. Perfect opportunity for both governments to distract the populace from internal difficulties by engaging a traditional external foe.

[Skybird]

Ever accidentally bump into or trip one of your friends? Well this is just the military equivalent.

Murphy's Laws of Combat.

Friendly Fire isnt.
The only thing more accurate than enemy fire is friendly fire.
Anything you do can get you killed including doing nothing.
Im just mocking the stupid terminology, "friendly fire".

Another example would would be these "barbaric acts of terrorism". How is an act of terrorism not barbaric, is there something like "civilized terrorism"?

[Oberon]

"civilized terrorism"?

Politics? :hmmm:

[Skybird]

Politics: organised crime, racketeering, based on the law of the jungle and the right of the strongest. Oligarchy interbreeding with ochlocracy.

And sometimes terrorism, yes. But never civilized.

[ikalugin]

Define "civilized". Because depending on how you do it sure, you can have civilized terrorism.

[August]

Im just mocking the stupid terminology, "friendly fire".

I know it's stupid but if there was a better term for fire generated by friendly forces accidentally impacting in or among other friendly forces that differentiates it with the far less ambiguous term enemy fire I'm sure they'd have adopted it by now. Any ideas?

And you can't say the German way of stringing that all together in a sentence-long word like
Firegeneratedbyfriendlyforcesaccidentallyimpacting inoramongotherfriendlyforcesthatdifferentiatesitwi ththefarlessambiguoustermenemyfire
Maybe DumbkopfScheisseShootzen?:D

Another example would would be these "barbaric acts of terrorism". How is an act of terrorism not barbaric, is there something like "civilized terrorism"?

Well actually that's just redundant but definitely an unnecessary extra adjective tossed on there.

[Oberon]

Blue on blue? :hmmm: It's about the same number of syllables. :hmmm:

Fratricide is another one, but that's generally considered as deliberate targetting IIRC.

[Skybird]

Define "civilized". Because depending on how you do it sure, you can have civilized terrorism.
Having a highly developed, advanced society and culture; showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable; refinement in taste and manners; cultured; polite; refined; well-bred.


Twist it if you want, but "civilized terrorism"? That is a fake fact. That is like painless suffering. Uncruel torture. Non-lethal execution. Humane blood-bath.

[Oberon]

Of course, defining terrorism is in and of itself a contentious subject because it's a pretty broad term. After all, as the saying goes 'One mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter'. :dead:

[August]

Having a highly developed, advanced society and culture; showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable; refinement in taste and manners; cultured; polite; refined; well-bred.

All that being highly subjective which was his point.

Twist it if you want, but "civilized terrorism"? That is a fake fact. That is like painless suffering. Uncruel torture. Non-lethal execution. Humane blood-bath.

Not a fake fact. A poorly constructed description perhaps but civilized is in the eye of the beholder.

[ikalugin]

Having a highly developed, advanced society and culture; showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable; refinement in taste and manners; cultured; polite; refined; well-bred.


Twist it if you want, but "civilized terrorism"? That is a fake fact. That is like painless suffering. Uncruel torture. Non-lethal execution. Humane blood-bath.
Above terms appear to be (atleast mostly) subjective, meaning that depending on how you define them terrorism can be civilised. If we define terrorism as the use of violence and means to achieve political (or other) ends, then either there is no civilised society to speak of because all societies are, at their core, are built around the use of violence or the threat of it's use or civilised terrorism can exist and indeed does.

[Onkel Neal]

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16602603_10154849772726163_1424477372725985777_n.j pg?oh=80ee08dbe5b1a8ef7e1a158f4814c72f&oe=5933FC86

[Oberon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

[Catfish]

Really, why don't they like us :haha:

[Oberon]

Really, why don't they like us :haha:

Robert Kennedy: By the way, China invaded India today.
Kenny O'Donnell: You're kidding, aren't you?
Robert Kennedy: Yeah, I wish I were. Galbraith is handling it in New Delhi. Makes you wonder what's coming next.
Kenny O'Donnell: Geez. What is it about the free world that pisses the rest of the world off?
Robert Kennedy: I don't know. We have Tupperware parties.

[Skybird]

Throw Turkey out of NATO.

https://euobserver.com/foreign/136568

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/erdogan-plotted-purge-before-coup-say-brussels-spies-2hh8mgx6h

And don't tell me it cannot be done, there is no diplomatic treaty allowing to kick members out of NATO. You boycott Turkish staff, you withdraw your staff from their territory and do not allow them onto yours or into NATO installations and headquarters, and you exclude them from military exercises, CCCI networks and intel gathering, and it is done.

It does not matter what the Turkish government would think of this, we must not care. We really must understand that Turkey now is hostile to what the "West" is.

[Skybird]

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16602603_10154849772726163_1424477372725985777_n.j pg?oh=80ee08dbe5b1a8ef7e1a158f4814c72f&oe=5933FC86
[krr-krch] "Attention - Mr Stevens, immediately report to the mental recallibration centre, Mr. Stevens please." [krr-krch]

[Catfish]

Throw Turkey out of NATO.

For one (or the second?!) time, i agree.
But Turkey now has the weapons deal with Mrs May.. maybe he can resell the jets to Daesh, so they can pay him with oil, and kill more Kurds.

Win-win :nope:

[eddie]

Daesh must be conserving ammo,instead of shooting suspected traitors,they put them in a steel cage and drown them instead.

http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/islamic-state-drown-13-civilians-death-mosul-treason/

[mapuc]

A sad case from Denmark

Sad in the way she is only 16 years old having her future ahead of her and then she make these decisions that have changed her life.

http://www.thelocal.dk/20170210/denmark-files-terrorism-charge-against-16-year-old-girl

Markus

[Rockstar]

If anything it's a testimony against the so called religion of peace. Interesting how a young girl from the West converts to Islam and now her hearts desire is to kill people with explosives.

[Catfish]

@ Mapuc: ^ Yes, this is very sad.

I cannot quite understand the desparation, to decide to act this way.

The only thing i could understand is despair, if there is absolutely no future worth living.

I do not get the religious fanatism, if it is that. I think it is more some kind of envy, or contempt.
Imagine you are coming from a country like Syriah. Maybe to Germany, maybe to Denmark, maybe to England.

You know how it is like at home. You know that all people in the country you currently are, have the means to know what is going on in you country. But they don't care. They live relatively luxurious, compared to your home town, and country, and give a sh... .
And they do not act or do anything, they just live their daily life, and maybe complain about banana prices, or bickering about how baaad it is here.
I guess this alone could generate a lot of hate.

If you then add some historical knowledge of how the western nations behave(d) towards your country in the past... the rest is self-evident.

In the long run the only solution is imho to give the people a decent education but i guess this is impossible to achieve, for all. At least as long we have artificial "nations" which compete against each other all the time, instead of achieving a goal together. Give people a future, regardless where they come from.
Apple is a good example.

[mapuc]

^ Catfish I forgot to say in my former post that this girl is 100 % ethnic Danish.

Markus

[Jimbuna]

Daesh must be conserving ammo,instead of shooting suspected traitors,they put them in a steel cage and drown them instead.

http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/islamic-state-drown-13-civilians-death-mosul-treason/

Hopefully the locals will respond in reciprocal fashion very soon.

[eddie]

I sure hope so Jim!! In spades too!

[eddie]

You know Jim, when I saw that pic on the link I provided, I couldn't help but wonder what kind of fear they felt, unbelievable!!!!

[Jimbuna]

I think one would have to personally live through the experience to truly understand :yep:

[ikalugin]

It appears that 4 Russian servicemen got IEDed in Syria.

[eddie]

Daesh is starting to use weaponized drones in Iraq, could be used in a terror attack somewhere too!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/use-of-%e2%80%98weaponized%e2%80%99-drones-by-isis-spurs-terrorism-fears/ar-AAnbaLH?li=BBnbcA1

[Oberon]

If it was that easy it would have been done already, drones have been around for a while and despite warnings that they would bring down airliners or drop bombs on people so far the most they've done in western society is drop packages into prisons.
Still, anti-drone weaponry is well into development, from EMP guns to birds of prey. It's mouse/mouse-trap syndrome, they'll find ways around our weapons, and then we'll find counters to theirs.

[August]

If it was that easy it would have been done already, drones have been around for a while and despite warnings that they would bring down airliners or drop bombs on people so far the most they've done in western society is drop packages into prisons.
Still, anti-drone weaponry is well into development, from EMP guns to birds of prey. It's mouse/mouse-trap syndrome, they'll find ways around our weapons, and then we'll find counters to theirs.

As you say development continues and what was once impossible will eventually become easy. Daesh isn't going to field anything near "state of the art" but we shouldn't underestimate their ability to macgiver something lower tech and make it effective.

[eddie]

The Iraqi Army in Mosul is finding this out the hard way, the Daesh armed drones have wounded and killed Iraqi soldiers with their cheap drones. One unarmed drone will find some Iraqi soldiers standing in a group some where, then they guide the armed drone to the area, where it releases its home made bombs right into the middle of the group. Very deadly even if on a small scale compared to a Hellfire missile.

[Oberon]

As you say development continues and what was once impossible will eventually become easy. Daesh isn't going to field anything near "state of the art" but we shouldn't underestimate their ability to macgiver something lower tech and make it effective.

The Iraqi Army in Mosul is finding this out the hard way, the Daesh armed drones have wounded and killed Iraqi soldiers with their cheap drones. One unarmed drone will find some Iraqi soldiers standing in a group some where, then they guide the armed drone to the area, where it releases its home made bombs right into the middle of the group. Very deadly even if on a small scale compared to a Hellfire missile.

True, I meant more in the case of a western situation, where it's harder to make the sort of improvised explosives without detection than it is in Iraq.
The sparsity of attacks in the west over the past couple of years indicates that either Daesh is not as well entrenched in the west as we'd lead ourselves to believe, or that our intelligence services are very good at identifying and preventing attacks...or (most likely) something in the middle.
That's not to discount the brutality and cost of the attacks when they do occur, but from a sheer numbers perspective, we're slaughtering them while they're just giving us paper cuts.

[eddie]

Oberon, you won't believe what a company does in China,lol A electric company has designed a flamethrower drone! They use it to clean debris that gets caught on the power lines. Like plastic bags, etc. They said it is safer then sending up a worker to clean them off by hand!

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a25282/flame-throwing-drones/

[Bilge_Rat]

So a suicide bomber attacked Iraqi forces near Mosul this week.

Turns out he was a former Guantanamo detainee (2002-04) who the UK government had lobbied to be released...after which they paid him $1.25 million as compensation.

Islamic State militants said Abu-Zakariya al-Britani, a British citizen who was originally known as Ronald Fiddler and then cast himself as Jamal Udeen al-Harith, detonated a car bomb at an Iraqi army base southwest of Mosul this week.

(...)

Britain made a civil damages settlement with British former Guantanamo Bay inmates in 2010 but did not disclose the size of the payouts, citing confidentiality agreements, then-Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke told parliament at the time.

The Daily Mail reported that Britani had been awarded $1.25 million by the British government after claiming British agents knew or were complicit in his alleged mistreatment.

Originally from the northern English city of Manchester, he converted to Islam in his 20s. He was detained in Afghanistan by U.S. special forces and taken to Guantanamo in 2002.

He was released in 2004 after the government of then-Prime Minister Tony Blair lobbied for his release. He later traveled to Syria to fight with Islamic State.


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-britain-militant-idUSKBN1611A8

you can't make this stuff up. :yep:

[Moonlight]

Par for the course for these bloody idiots we've got in power here, we're talking the UK government who are all supposed to be educated but time after time they have proven that they are the thickest set of pillocks ever to inhabit infest the house of parliament. :up:

[Oberon]

Wonder if he was a radical before or after he was sent to Guantánamo after being rescued from Taliban prison. :hmmm:

[Bilge_Rat]

Wonder if he was a radical before or after he was sent to Guantánamo after being rescued from Taliban prison. :hmmm:

of course, poor innocent picked-on soul. Its all society's fault don't you know.

Al-Harith was detained in Kabul by US forces who found his explanations regarding the purpose of his travels in the region to be implausible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Udeen_Al-Harith


Maybe the UK government should pay his widow another 1 million pounds as compensation. :yep:

[Rockstar]

Wonder if he was a radical before or after he was sent to Guantánamo after being rescued from Taliban prison. :hmmm:

I don't know, but my guess is probably the same idea which made Ronald want to kill people was the same one that gave that 15 year Danish school girl the desire to want to kill people.

I find highly unlikely GITMO had anything to do with their decisions to kill.

[MaDef]

Wonder if he was a radical before or after he was sent to Guantánamo after being rescued from Taliban prison. :hmmm:

I'm with Rockstar on this, The guy had choices, He chose to become a suicide bomber, reserve your sympathy for the 5 children he left in the hands of Daesh.

[Bilge_Rat]

more info on Ronald Fiddler from his DoD file, courtesy of Wikileaks:

He was also accused of being “probably involved” in a terrorist attack against the United States. Officials said he traveled to the Middle East extensively from 1992 to 1996, including with Abu Bakr, an al-Qaeda operative, to Sudan in 1992, during the time when Osama Bin Laden’s network was active there. He told interrogators he attended a school in Sudan, but the DOD said that school did not actually exist.

“The only information they could find for foreigners to go to Khartoum, Sudan, was for Islamic studies in which a majority of the time the individuals were recruited for training in sabotage, kidnapping, improvised explosive devices and commando training,” the documents say. “According to British Embassy personnel on the scene at the Surpozza Prison when the five political prisoners were released, Jamal Al-Harith was indicated as being the ‘leader’ of the five prisoners. They further stated that Al-Harith was cocky and evasive stating that he had provided all the he was going to provide the British Embassy personnel. This was after he had sent a request to the British Embassy through the Red Cross to get out of Afghanistan.”

The DOD also said Fiddler told soldiers he had never been to Saudi Arabia, but told other detainees a meal he ate at Guantanamo tasted like one he had in Jedda, Saudi Arabia.

He was deemed to be a “high threat to the U.S.” and was considered an al-Qaeda fighter by the DOD.

https://wikileaks.ch/gitmo/prisoner/490.html

again, according to his file, he was arrested by the Taliban when he tried to enter Afghanistan on october 3rd, 2001. This is less than 3 weeks after 9/11 and only 2-3 weeks before U.S. forces invaded.

seems like an odd time to do some "tourism".

I am not surprised the U.S. detained him and sent him to Guantanamo.

What I don't understand is why the UK government felt obliged to give him $ 1.25 million given these facts. It smells very much like a purely political decision.

[Oberon]

Probably something to do with the torture he received which....

Ah forget it, who really cares?

[Catfish]

of course, poor innocent picked-on soul. Its all society's fault don't you know. [...]

Of course, of course.
But then you do not know what i would do if i would have been kidnapped, imprisoned in Guantanamo without court case or verdict, been tortured and having lost 15 years of my life, while being innocent? Murat Kurnaz anyone?

It is well known there are a lot of innocent people "detained", which is b.t.w. such a nice word versus captured, kidnapped, imprisoned and tortured. Orwell in full swing.
And there are still a lot there without even having had a trial, or court case. Just why?!

Ok this guy seems indeed to have been involved in a lot of planning and meeting the "right" people. And I do not say i have sympathy with this guy, but the choice of words and reasoning and putting all "detained" under a general suspicion without accusing or hearing, is disgusting.

[Rockstar]

And the 14 year old school girl? Other than having to bear the burdern of being privileged, white, european and female who still lived with mommy and daddy. What terrible thing did we do that forced her to want to blow up a school? Im mean since this religion has nothing but great, uplifting, and friendly things to say about those who dont submit to it and its god. The only thing in common two people had that made them want to kill isn't Islam, no it couldn be that. It must be something we said or done to her and Ronald that made them want to do this, there is no other possible explanation.

[mapuc]

Maybe wrong thread

Last time an American TV-Channel send a reporter into an area where there only live immigrants in some Swedish town it didn't go to well, either they got beaten or threaten.

So this time they send a war reporter one who have been in the line of fire many times.

They are sending him to the Swedish town Malmoe.

Markus

[Bilge_Rat]

Of course, of course.
But then you do not know what i would do if i would have been kidnapped, imprisoned in Guantanamo without court case or verdict, been tortured and having lost 15 years of my life, while being innocent? Murat Kurnaz anyone?

It is well known there are a lot of innocent people "detained", which is b.t.w. such a nice word versus captured, kidnapped, imprisoned and tortured. Orwell in full swing.
And there are still a lot there without even having had a trial, or court case. Just why?!

Ok this guy seems indeed to have been involved in a lot of planning and meeting the "right" people. And I do not say i have sympathy with this guy, but the choice of words and reasoning and putting all "detained" under a general suspicion without accusing or hearing, is disgusting.

That is the same old trope that any actions taken by Western states to protect themselves leads to "radicalisation". It is the same arguments bleeding heart liberals keep trotting out, you hear the same tired old arguments about Trump's travel ban.

Guantanamo did not just happen. 3,000 innocent men, women and children died on 9/11. Hundreds jumped to their death instead of being burned alive.

U.S. forces did not randomly sweep up muslims and ship them off to Guantanamo. All their files are available courtesy of Wikileaks and you can see many had suspicious or confirmed ties to terrorist groups. Out of 693 released, 213 (30%) were confirmed/suspected to have gone back to terrorist groups as of july 2016 and many analysts think the numbers could be higher since many, like Ronnie Fiddler, are avoiding detection.

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/FINAL%20-%20GTMO%20Unclass%20CDA%20Response%20-%20September%202016.pdf

The truth is that Ronnie Fiddler was a terrorist before he went to Guantanamo, he was a terrorist after he was released and all his supporters were taken in by his lies.

On the subject of radicalisation, Sweden is the opposite of the USA. It welcomes refugees, gives them free housing, generous social benefits and a welcoming social environment. So why is it that the suburbs of Stockholm are now prime recruiting grounds for Al-Shabab?

The problems Sweden faces integrating large numbers of Muslim immigrants is a subject on which Nordstjernan columnist Ulf Nilson has written many times. His warnings of increasing radicalization among Sweden’s Muslims – warnings he started to broadcast a decade ago – now seem eerily prophetic in light of an Associated Press investigation that found Stockholm to be a breeding ground for jihadists among Swedish Somalis. According to the AP report, which first ran Jan. 24, an al-Qaida-linked group is busy recruiting anti-government fighters among Somali youths living in Rinkeby. A suburb of Stockholm, Rinkeby has earned the nickname of “Little Mogadishu” because of the number of Somalis living there. Rinkeby is also the center of the recruiting efforts of al-Shabab, a group with ties to al-Qaida.

The most disquieting aspect of this effort is who al-Shabab is targeting – second-generation Somali immigrants. According to AP, about 20 Rinkeby residents have joined a bloody insurgency against Somalia's government. According to SÄPO, the Swedish state security police, five of them have been killed and 10 are still at large in Somalia.

http://www.nordstjernan.com/news/sweden/1897/

It really is time for bleeding heart liberals to stop looking at the world through rose tinted glasses.

[Oberon]

It really is time for bleeding heart liberals

No.


No it isn't.

It isn't time for 'bleeding heart liberals' to do anything. You lot aren't going to change so why should we?

[Jimbuna]

One thing is beyond doubt and that is the fact he was a terrorist when he met his end so....GOOD RIDDANCE!!

[August]

No.


No it isn't.

It isn't time for 'bleeding heart liberals' to do anything. You lot aren't going to change so why should we?

Well I guess you can keep on drinking the koolaid until our society is destroyed and anarchy reigns supreme or you can finally learn to recognize the fact that your attempts at multiculturalism have caused society significant problems.

Like BR says countries like Sweden who welcome refugees still have major problems with radicalism which doesn't fit the narrative you've been promoting all these years. Your sides social experiment just isn't working. So what are you going to do about it besides continually slander and lie about my countries president?

[Oberon]

Well I guess you can keep on drinking the koolaid until our society is destroyed and anarchy reigns supreme

Ok. :up: I'll drink mine and you drink yours. :yep:

[MaDef]

Ok. :up: I'll drink mine and you drink yours. :yep:Just make sure it's not grape flavored. :D

[Oberon]

Just make sure it's not grape flavored. :D

Make America Grape Again? :o

[MaDef]

Make America Grape Again? :o Just an obscure reference to Jonestown, Guyana, where grape kool-aid was used by the inhabitants to commit suicide back in 78'.

[Oberon]

Just an obscure reference to Jonestown, Guyana, where grape kool-aid was used by the inhabitants to commit suicide back in 78'.

I figured as much, IIRC that's where the whole Kool-Aid term came from was it not?

[MaDef]

I figured as much, IIRC that's where the whole Kool-Aid term came from was it not?Yep, although the majority of the Kool-Aid was actually found to be Flavor-Aid (kool-Aids competitor). That bit of knowledge is small recompense for the surviving family, relatives & friends though.

[August]

"Drink the Koolaid"

The term has evolved to mean swallowing the bitter poison of propaganda. Often used in reference to politics. :up:

[MaDef]

"Drink the Koolaid"

The term has evolved to mean swallowing the bitter poison of propaganda. Often used in reference to politics. :up:
That's why it comes in all those different fruity flavors, makes it easier to swallow.:up:

[Oberon]

That's why it comes in all those different fruity flavors, makes it easier to swallow.:up:

Wait...wait...wait...so is Flavor-Aid fake Kool-aid? :hmmm:

[MaDef]

Wait...wait...wait...so is Flavor-Aid fake Kool-aid? :hmmm:
depends on how you look at it, Kool-Aid hit the market in 1927, Flavor-Aid didn't appear until 1929. Kind of like Coors (est.1873) and Budweiser (est.1876) they came on the market at different times but they are both considered beer, and neither one is fake.

[Catfish]

Hello again,
sorry for being late, i did not want to place my post here and run away, just too much to do yesterday.

@Jim Yes, good riddance of course, the random slaughter of innocent and children makes all this talk of terrorists of being "righteous" or "for Allah" completely futile. Taking hostages is the lowest form to prove anything.

@Bilge rat: Yes, meanwhile i think you are right. Even i am becoming tired lately of excusing anything again and again, when there is no excuse. I had just read about the terrorist's family and how they stated that he had changed after his 1 1/2 years (not 15) at Guantanamo, but that they never would have expected him to do this. They obviously never thought that he might have just been lying.
It is difficult enough to spot terrorists, let alone arresting them in time, before committing something. This is really a problem, in our "enlightened" constitutions someone has to act before we can act, so how can we prove that he is up to something illegal before he does it. Finding explosives at suspects' homes is hint enough, but not all do this at home.

I can also not understand how this "radicalisation" works. Had he committed his deed right after Guantanamo, there could have had been at least some explanation, but he did it ten years later after founding a family. WTF??

[Oberon]

"Oh, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world,
That has such people in ’t!"


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39096833

[Rockstar]

Thats what happens when those extending invitations do not have to live with the consequences of their actions. How would you react if I invited a homeless man and his family to live in your house and on top that require you to make your already crowded house bigger to accomodate them? Dont get mad me because then I'll call you a right wing hitler loving nazi if you do. My advice would be to just shut up and take it. Oh don't bother calling me with any of your problems either because I'll be at my members only country club having tea dreaming up new ways to make 'my', oops! Im mean, 'your' world a better place.

Lol But Trump is a dictator! derp

[Rockstar]

Oh ya I almost forgot. Once you've built that new addition and the homeless family has moved in with you. I'll be down for a photo op with them so the world know just how generous I am. And remember now say a word and we will lable you a hitler lovin nazi so just shut up and take it. Now if you'll excuse me I and my associates have to take a picture with that new homeless family we invited into your home.

[Oberon]

Ah, so that makes it all alright then, jolly good. :up:

Carry on everyone, those different looking people won't evict themselves. :yeah:

[Oberon]

To clarify the above, I do not think the mistakes of government should be inflicted upon the immigrant communities, that assaulting, vandalising or launching arson attacks on immigrant communities is wrong, simply because of an action that they had no control over.
And before I get attacked for it, I also think that the anti-government protests in the US that assault, vandalise and launch arson are also wrong, but I disagree with the Arizona bill because of how it is open for abuse.
Peaceful protest is one thing, riots are quite another.

There, I've said my bit, and no doubt I'm in the minority...I should really learn to not bother.

[u crank]

To clarify the above, I do not think the mistakes of government should be inflicted upon the immigrant communities, that assaulting, vandalising or launching arson attacks on immigrant communities is wrong, simply because of an action that they had no control over.


I think most people here would agree with that. I do.

And you got that part right as well....the mistakes of government.

[Catfish]

Just some thoughts.
There is enough space and even enough money for dealing with migrants in Germany. So saying that "they" take away "our" jobs, money, living space (Lebensraum beware!) or germans having to abstain from any luxury because of (any) foreigners, is not true. No one has to suffer here because of "them". Yet. Speculators are making big money here with building homes for refugees, a certain kind of war profiteers if you so want.

No families are being forced to accomodate foreigners here. It is even the other way round, if you offer an apartment for refugees, you have to read and sign masses of paper, explain at length why you'd want to do that, and the place has to fulfill certain standards like two toilets, fire protection requirements and all that (something that is not self evident in private homes). This process may take years(!), it is completely voluntarily, and most refugees are therefore stuffed into former military barracks. Packed together, unsure of the future, under often bad sanitary conditions, with growing frustration, this can of course become a breeding ground for radicalisation.

Terrorist attacks and molesting women, yes, happens, and there is no excuse. Although the number is small compared to good native germans also doing that. Terrorism has been on an entirely higher level in the 1970ies and 80ies here though, with the german RAF ("Rote Armee Fraktion"). Also those who assasssinate or take hostages are not the majority, as usual a few idiots give them all a bad name. I dare to say that terrorists who want to attack Germany or the "West" generally, would do that anyway, and find their way over the borders with or without control.
One more thing: As soon as someone speaks about "them" raping "our" women, killing children, terrorizing or stealing our "Kultur", they are on a direct propaganda path to war.

While i do not agree with Mrs Merkel in a lot of points, i think accepting the refugees and not closing the borders was a well-meant humanitarian reaction. A greater part of the population has also welcomed them, and helped (and still helps) them to accomodate and get necessary papers, german language courses, and getting their feet on the ground again. Most are not "economical refugees" but fled for dear life; you really have to listen to what they fled from to get a glimpse of what they lived through.

There will be always people who stage riots out of xenophobia or just being against "the system". And of course there are a lot of hating Neonazis here who thrive from every awful incident that can be connected to foreigners, to claim justification and reason for their (self)rightous cause, and action. Like the terrorists, they are not the majority.
You also have to see that it is not all "migration". While some are being accepted and integrated, a lot of the refugees want to, and will go back, when the war in Syriah is over, and the situation has calmed down.

It is obvious that some nations like what happens here, to have another reason or justification to reject refugees. Trump should have mentioned Germany instead of Sweden, much more going on here. But just of all those who caused the mess in the middle east now turn their backs, close the borders, and accuse others trying to help refugees? Despite what you may see in the media, there is almost no influence to normal life and citizens here. Even less in Sweden. Yes i know, tell this to the victims. I do not say it is an easy situation.


And no, Trump is of course no dictator. It may sound strange just of all coming from me, but i'd still say give him time. You know the media here are of course as biased as they are anywhere, you never heard about Obama blocking out Fox News back then for similar reasons, in the german media.

[Bilge_Rat]

"Oh, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world,
That has such people in ’t!"


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39096833

Agreed. That is pretty bad, those Germans really should be ashamed of their behavior.

[Skybird]

"There is enough space in germany..."

My God, Catfish...

Geographcially maybe, we could invite all 7.3 billion members of the human race by that argument. We build megacities, we plaster all forest and meadows and build many skyscrapers. It could be done.

Catfish completely ignores the reality of culture, social value systems, identity feelings, tribal bonding. Logistics and supply not even mentioned.

While dealing mostly with mgrants from places tzat do nto share his total absence of own idnty at all, but insist on their identy feelign being very strong.

And that is a very different identity background.

Always denying oruselves we Germans must, ight, ctafish? We shall never be again what we are: ourselves. We must be living oly for the sake of the others.

"If the tolerant even tolerate the intolerant, than the intolerant will overcome the tolerant and rule them out, and with them: tolerance." (Popper, ironcially a very left-leaning thinker). What he says on tolerance there, can be out the same way about "identity", and what i usually call the "historically grown feeling of own identity":

"If somebody denies his own identity and only lives for the sake of the others identity, he will seize to be himself, and become the other. "

Before somebody accepts that as his recipe for global peace, I recmmend to look very close whethr one really is well advised to indeed wanting to embrace the other that unconditionally. I have seen enough of North Africa and the Middle East as if I could ever be tempted to want that again.

I only say once again: Rome, end of the first republic. It reads like a comment on the modern EU. Almst identical cionstellations, almost idnetical problsm - almost idnritcla behaviour by the polticians, almost idnetical behaviour by the crowds. The end was the demise of the first republic. It just could not hold the pressure the many foreigners put the home culture under. And so it broke.

[Catfish]

Yes, i meant it geographically, but also socially.

The german population is a bit more than 82 million people.
Overall the amount of asylum seekers and people with "migration background" is around 25 percent in Germany, but a lot of them live here since 20+ years.
12 million people with german roots had to leave after WW2 and came to Germany as immigrants. So you say they do not count because their culture, belief etc. are the same as here. But that posed enough problems because of the sheer numbers, for accomodation and food alone shortly after the war, when all lay in rubbles. But we do not have housing or food problems now.

There are 16,000 applications from asylum seekers for january this year, do you really lose your identity and culture because of the last two years? And they are being accepted, because of Germany having signed the Geneva convention, which has not much to do with german law, nor the EU.

I certainly see your point, i also do not have much sympathy for e.g. Turkis Imams if they abuse their mosques for radicalising, or others demonstrating or spying for Erdoghan. But place them on the same list as e.g. Syrians?
"All foreigners, bad."


Regarding the comparison with Rome, the EU was and is never as united as the Romans, nor was or is it an Empire. Tribal bonds, if you want to get back to this we can instantly fall back into Bavarians, Suebes, Saxons, Chattes and so on. It was a process that made a nation out of tribes, and it will be another process to unite nations to something bigger. Do not forget traits and bias, but concentrate on the similarities.

[ikalugin]

That feel when Skybird pushes you to be a classical liberal.

[Dowly]

I only say once again: Rome, end of the first republic. It reads like a comment on the modern EU. Almst identical cionstellations, almost idnetical problsm - almost idnritcla behaviour by the polticians, almost idnetical behaviour by the crowds. The end was the demise of the first republic. It just could not hold the pressure the many foreigners put the home culture under. And so it broke.
That is a very silly thing to say.

[Skybird]

That is a very silly thing to say.
No, its a historical fact, I just somewhat extrenmely summarised a long chapter right oin this, I do not translate a 600 pages book here.

At the time of the first republic stagnating itself to death, so to speak, the social circumstances of the Roman republic where such that the farms where mostly either abandoned or owned in huge numbers by only few - thus even rhicher - landlords and their armies of slaves. The former Italic than Roman farmers all either had to move to Rome itself, or had "died out" due to several costly wars in a row reducing the general population and even thinning out the Romans living in Rome itsels, also in the around 600 families whose leaders joined ranks of senators, and around 24000 "knights", both social ranks/classes were wealth-dependant (for knighthood you had to own at least 400 thousand and for a senator you had to own at least one million sesterzen). At the same time moral standards had declined - ironically due to the focussing on individual freedoms and rights that were made possible by the former wealth. This new focus led to an loosening of sexual relations, resulting in declining birth rates of the original Romans, which was compensated by more and more foreigners moving into the city: traders, craftsmen, and of course slaves. Since the growing "liberalism" led to slaves beign freed in higher and higher numbers, and by Roman law these former slaves immediately gained Roman citizenship with all citizen rights, you had a massive increase of what was foreign in Roman culturer and tradition, and an explosion of foreigners that were not originally ioman at all. The relation between original Roman people and originally non-Roman people rapidly tipped in favour of the latter. And you had a massive dysbalance between those who possessed wealth, and those who did not.

This necessarily led to a dissolving, a watering down of Roman identity and "old" values of Roman tradition. The state bogged down in reforms it could no longer bring through the more and more corrupt political system, opportunism and costly favours to the masses to bribe them for obedience and wanted election results did their share as well, and in the end the authoriuty of the state and the dominance of Roman identity within what was considered the realm of Rome, was so much under pressure that the old order broke down and the Caesars - the imperial order which effectively was a military dictatorship - rose. Of course, the principle of panem et circensis, bread and games, is to be mentioned here as well. The state could no longer maintain the support it had pledged to the masses, food supply was in danger (the free wheat allocations), security no longer guaranteed, and so the people of Rome followed Sulla and the men coming after him, Caesar, Augustus because these brought back law and order and stability, or so they promised. The price was costly, but without alternative, it seems. The old first republic was a thing of the past, and the imperial order arrived, under Augustus at the latest. The military reform under Sulla btw also was due to the breaking down of the old order: the legions feared that they could no longer recruit sufficient Romans, since there simply were not sufficient Romans anymore that could afford to serve in the legions, because before Sulla the warriors had to pay for their equipment themselves, like later in the european middle age it was once again for the feudal elite, and like it had been before in ancient Greece. With Sulla came the professional army, maintained and paid and equipped by the state.

Just a very brief, extremely "rude" summary, told by memory, but as I said, I have no intention to translate whole chapters from a 600 pages book here.

The parallels to the EU's situation today should even after this short summary be obvious. We have the same problems of social composition, eroding identity, mass migration, dissolving of own cultural origin, corrupt politics and narcissistic leaders, blocked reforms and the impossibility to see them through, and the raise of the strong "Führer" promising to heal the worries of the present by strengthening the values of the past again.

I cannot stress enough how very good that book, comparing the EU and the Roman first republics demise, is. Link and info somewhere above, in this and another thread.

[Skybird]

Yes, i meant it geographically, but also socially.

The german population is a bit more than 82 million people.
Overall the amount of asylum seekers and people with "migration background" is around 25 percent in Germany, but a lot of them live here since 20+ years.
12 million people with german roots had to leave after WW2 and came to Germany as immigrants. So you say they do not count because their culture, belief etc. are the same as here. But that posed enough problems because of the sheer numbers, for accomodation and food alone shortly after the war, when all lay in rubbles. But we do not have housing or food problems now.

There are 16,000 applications from asylum seekers for january this year, do you really lose your identity and culture because of the last two years? And they are being accepted, because of Germany having signed the Geneva convention, which has not much to do with german law, nor the EU.

I certainly see your point, i also do not have much sympathy for e.g. Turkis Imams if they abuse their mosques for radicalising, or others demonstrating or spying for Erdoghan. But place them on the same list as e.g. Syrians?
"All foreigners, bad."


Regarding the comparison with Rome, the EU was and is never as united as the Romans, nor was or is it an Empire. Tribal bonds, if you want to get back to this we can instantly fall back into Bavarians, Suebes, Saxons, Chattes and so on. It was a process that made a nation out of tribes, and it will be another process to unite nations to something bigger. Do not forget traits and bias, but concentrate on the similarities.
You may want to meditate a bit about what it mans if the second generaiton of Turks living here were more conservative and rlegiousl yorthodox than the fiorst, and the third more conservative and relgiously orthodox than the second. You may want to think about what it merans that migrants from Muslim countires are massoively overrepesented in several crime categories. And I think I just not explain how very string many Turks feel about their still natvie Turksih identity, different to Germans feeling abotu theirs. Finally I point out that the birth rate of Turkish women in Germany IS HIGHER (!) than that of turkish women in Turkey.

Now compare that to the EU, that in the preambel for the EU constitution (no word games heren we all know that that is what it is intended to be, even if they do not dare to call it that) first wanted to loosely mention the meaning of Christian tradition for the foriming of modern Western ideals and vlaues, and the importance of the Greek-Roman tradition and its philosophy originally also was planned to be briefly mentioned. But then they thought that this might cause offence with foreign religions, namely Islam, and would ridicule the all-domiant in fluence of these on the unflding of Europe, so they skipped the passage mentioning the christioan tradition having influenced the European value canon. But then came others and said that pointing out the meaning of Roman-Greek tradition also would minimise the importance of the other cultures there are, and so the mentioned qualities the Eu wants to get associated with got unlinked form that as well and the frief mentioning of Greece an drome and their philosophies was deleted as well.

What remained is a preamble from the test tube, as I call it, a list of totally-unindividual, generlaised and highly universal values that due to their
universatality in the end claim nothing less to not describe just a national or a European unioform identity, but to speak for all manklind. In other words, the EU wants to be seen beside the UN as somethign like the UN.

The problem is that this asrtifical identity is lifeless, and not that much attractive at all for many people, since it coimpletes ignores the felt hostric roots of people, even denies and rejects them, even sits still and silent when Christian relgion gets offended, made fun of, ridiculed - while at the same time bombastically boosting attention for the sentiments and animosities of foergjn cultures who have had only limited, and often evry hostile,. destriuctive infoeunce on Europe. The relaiton of Islam with Europe is one of aggression, attack and conquest - and always claim for more of Europe, to be taken with vioence and force or any other meaning needed. And who cares to confront Islam with the mass killing of 80 million buddhists and hindus during the Muslim attempt to destroy the Indian high culture, like IUslam always tries to destroy all evidnece and relics of forteiogn cultgurs that are ot iutself?

The West, the EU masisvely use double standards here. And this is due to ideologic blindness, megalomania and a craving for poltically correct PR, and an uncomfortable, vague feeling of that one is weak and has not what it takes to stop this massive inrush of the foreign. Appeasment thus has become the parole of our time. And hoping for the best.

But as General Sharon said: "Hope is no good strategy." And as I say :) : "Weakness is never noble or valuable, but always is nothing else than just: weakness." A loss in degrees of freedom is no gaining of freedom. A reduction of options available, is no strength, but weakness.

Its better to be strong and not needing it to be, than needing to be strong and finding out that one is not.

[Dowly]

No, its a historical fact, I just somewhat extrenmely summarised a long chapter right oin this, I do not translate a 600 pages book here.

*SNIP*


None of what you wrote really support "It just could not hold the pressure the many foreigners put the home culture under. And so it broke." as the big reason for the fall of the Republic.
You are of course free to make that interpretation, but by doing so you ignore the various other, much larger, factors that contributed to the fall.

[Oberon]

I think that another slightly more modern example to look at would be the Anglo-Saxon migration to England in the aftermath of the fall of Rome. It's often portrayed as an invasion when it was not all military based, but instead a change in population ethnicity, which started off as being Germanic Pagan in religion whilst pushing into Celtic Christian lands, however in the space of about a century they began to gradually convert to Roman Christianity (and some to Celtic too) and the interbreeding between the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons changed the ethnic make-up of the British isles completely.
I think that where we are right now is probably around the early 6th century, we've got mass-migration and clashes of ethnicity taking place, but at the same time there are multiple instances of the mingling of ethnicity that will in time change the basic identity of the nation. For the better, for the worse? Only history can tell us that, but at the time there were definitely winners and losers across the country, and it wasn't necessarily guaranteed that the Anglo-Saxons would become the dominant culture of England, certainly in the immediate aftermath of the supposed battle at Badon Hill it would seem that the Germanic 'invaders' were doomed to defeat, but we know looking back that things turned out differently.

Does this mean that we're under threat from the Muslim hordes? It could possibly be interpreted that way, if you are so resistant to change and the march of history it can definitely be interpreted that way. Or it could also be interpreted that we are just in another period of great change, and that what comes from this will be different to what once was. After all, in the last one hundred years Germany has undergone some massive upheavals and social changes, probably more so than any other nation in Europe. It survived these...I'm sure it can survive this.

[Skybird]

None of what you wrote really support "It just could not hold the pressure the many foreigners put the home culture under. And so it broke." as the big reason for the fall of the Republic.
You are of course free to make that interpretation, but by doing so you ignore the various other, much larger, factors that contributed to the fall.

Rome lost its own feeling of a coherent identity, and that was what indeed led to its demise. You do not want to see that, okay, but still - that was what it all was about. Quite some hostirc witnesses whose scriptures are being read until today, poets, senators and philosophers alike, complained about the massive degeneration of manners, sexual ethics, family ties and feeling of committments to the higher cause of Rome - as well as the huge number of foreigners arriving and especially the exploding number of slaves who got freed and became Roman citizens immediately, due to the Roman laws. There were times when it was considered and I think even turne dinto shortz-lasting law that Roman men between 25 and 55 had to be married, else were (financially) punished and socially banned, and where it was almost a state order that Roman men had to found families (= make Roman babies). That was not due to a shortage in inhabitants, but the balance between Romans and non-Romans dripping dangerously in favour of the latter. The original Roman population shrunk, and it abandoned more and more it classic values and moral standards, ironcially in the name of focussing on greater individual rights and freedoms. But individualty and collective interest are mutually exlcusive - the more of the one, the less of the other you necessarily can have. We see the same happening in the EU today. The more you set the accent for individual rights and freedoms, the more you necessarily lose the sense for group membership, obligations to the community, identity that goes beyond the pleasing of your own personal demands and desires. the more you are focussed on yourself the more you lose contact to the identity of your peer group, your society you are embedded in - all this egocentrism and focus on own pleasure and fulfilling of desires which in Rome at that time all to often were focussed on circensis, sex without accepting binding to a partner and a family (= no babies made) and the subsequent obligations and duties, and thus an erosion of former family values and their worshipping.

We have all that today as well.

I should tell you something on the method the author of the quoted book works by. He took the moral and value-related categories and terms by which the EU wants to be defined in its own self-perception as they are expressed in the yearly so-called Eurobarometer by Eurostat statistics office. (A short comparison with these values asked for in relation to how important people consider them to be for themselves, their own life, showed some very revealing discrepancies between what peopole valued in their own life, and what they associated the EU with. The EU'S publicaiton had it sown interpretation and way to ignore this, of course, or to hide it, but it is woirth the time to check the implications of these differrences that are relevant and can be seen betwene the lines, so to speak.) Since Engels he worked towards a release of the book in 2012, he based on the statistics of the year 2008. The EU asks in these statistics in which sequence people would rank the wanted qualities when beign asked which of these they associate to be representative for the EU, people also get asked which of these values and qualities they identified with personally. The EU therefore does not ask people what qualities they attribute to the EU, but already defined a list of wanted qualities that peopel simply have to take as granted, which of course is form of a suggestive phrasing and imo already represents a serious methodological flaw. The author then takes one chapter for each of these categories, and splits it into half, and then put vis-a-vis a.) the known sociologial data of the present EU, its statistcally collected numbers and political realities, the events of the present and their sociological relevance, and b.) the corresponding Roman time witness reports, historical scriptures and what else historians know about Rome, gives hints and assessments of the validity and trustworthiness of these sources, and then compares both eras directly to each other. That the author is academic expert for ancient Rome, Greece, the religious systems of these eras and spheres and the rulership of the Seleukides, of course is a great help - he knows his stuff, the appendix is over 50 pages thick, just with sources and quotes from these sources. I mean I have one half of that book done now, and I got an impression: that guy is extremely smart, and extremely educated on the matter, trust me. Its one of the best history books I have ever red.

Those Eurobarometer categories and statistics can be accessed here:

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb69/eb69_values_en.pdf

Consequently, each of these categories gets its own chapter and gets analysed, put in relation and in historic context, and gets critically questioned. Most of the book is about this.

I know you do not speak German, but what about French? The German edition came second, but got reviosned and complemented, the original version however and first release, was in French. It still is available (and a best-seller, which is anything but common for s history book).

Its not as if he direction of David Engels is new to me, but he has much greater detailed knowledge than I have, and is able to set these details up much more consistently in one complete setting and format than i could when I put together a quick posting. I mean I do not write for academic standard. The value of lecture like this for me lies in that it helps me to add some structure to my many specific but often unconnected pieces and bits of info flying around in my head, a framework in which it can all fall into a matching place to form a better model, a better picture than what I try to explain sometimes. It helps me to get my thoughts and own info better sorted. For others this may appear as if I were just parroting some guy whom I happened to stumble over. But that it is not. Also, I can differ between intelligent authors, and manipulative or dumb ones. For example I can see in some comments by Engels that he seems to be quite critical of capitalism and free markets, for example - but I see the consistency in his thinking and line of arguments, and so I nevertheless deeply respect him even while I obviously disagree with him on such things, which are quite fundamental, important things. I do not often feel like this for somebody who opposes my views on such fundamental questions. I also realised that he forced me to look at the Rome-EU comparison with greate rprecision and clarity. Before, I usually argued that the EU is faling like Rome fell after it split and then desintegrated. Engels force dme to realsied that the far more obvious comnpariuson is between the EU'S fall and the fall of the Roman first republic. He convinced me - with superior information and better argument. - Why do I point that out? Because sometimes I got accused that I wojuld njot chnage my mind anyway, no matter what somebody posts. By examples in this forums history, that is not true. This guy changed my mind - and I have changed my mind on things discussed in the forum over the years as well. But I demand to be given good reasons to do so. I do not change my mind just to do somebody else a favour.

That you do not like the conclusions by the author, I can easily imagine. But I cannot see you being able to counter his very strong evidence and very strong arguments. Many peopole will not like the book. Still - counter it by its stated conclusions and facts, not by worldview and ideological claim.

[Catfish]

That feel when Skybird pushes you to be a classical liberal.

Had not seen that yet.
:haha::up:

[Dowly]

Rome lost its own feeling of a coherent identity...
*SNIP*
Sorry, I'm still confused how you link all that to pressure from foreign cultures?

And not to, for example, the good ol' greed and seek for personal greatness that was not unknown to Romans.

[Skybird]

Because the presence of an rapidly growing number of foreign cults, beliefs, religions, and an erosion of conviction in Roman religion, based on the Greek basis, because the Roman religion was much focussed on just formal ritual : the gos were satisfied if the rite was run correctly, no more to say, it was not so much about faith or belief felt with zeal and fervor. There was a time before the republic fell when the temples in Rome were mostly abandoned and the various Roman deities's cults did not even find enough people who were interested in wanting to become priests or servants to the cult, not to mention that people did not attend the ceremonies anymore. The religion erdoded from within, and was under pressure from exotic, foreign ones that set other accents and foci, much more on personal fervor, on conviction, and last, with christianty at the latest: the afterlife instead of a parallel universe where the deities lived, or the present, earthly life.

The answer to your question is complex, but the shifting of the balance between native Roman people and foreigners (migrants, freed slaves), and religion eroding, are two of these. There are more factors, and it all interacted. The individualization in society led to a decrease in cultural solidarity and identification with traditional values. Which led to a re-valuation of values of personal rights. The void felt by the abandoning of one's own relgious identity led to the vulnerabulity for earthly pleasures and excesses, and the circus. The materialsim growing on the othe rhand enbaled and allowed the focussing on the less pressing immediate material needs, like said individual rights and freedoms. Which changed and reduced the value the institution of the family had enjoyed before. which affected birth rates. And so forth. What we call today a - in Europe almost self-denying - respect for the foreign, the exotic other culture, at least translated into fascination for other cultures back then - at he cost of the Roman one. Several leaders and landmark figures of Roman history left us written evidence of their bitter complants and criticism of these things.

Again it must be re-iterated that the factors that weigh in here and the way they interacted and formed the demise of the former "home" order and culture, directly compare to the way things slide in Europe today as well. The parallels in active factors and the way the whole thing moves, are stunning, to me the historic quotations and material, and the data of the present given, is very convincing.


Therefore I learned that comparing the EU's modern status to the demise of the first republic makes much more sense than to compare it to the ultimate fall of Rome after it split up centuries later, a comparison that I used to follow before. Engels lays out a much better founded, more convincing case for seeing it like this.

In the end, every coin has two sides, and where there is an "up" there also is a "down". Back then and today: whatever the focus is beign put on by a society, it creates an opposite trend as well, and consequences that cannot be avoided. We lose social integrity today right because we focus so strongly on individual rights and out the individuum before the collective, and becasue we cann materialistically afford that.. We claim the right of free sexual self-expression and so should not be amazed to see the devaluing of founding and running a family and birth rates shrinking - with birth rates growing in those migrant families that come from cultures that different to us put a very strong emphasis on putting their own identity before any other. Result? Saying it without any emotion, nativ Europeans get outbred, that simple, a thing of simple math. Most Europeans today are shy to confess they feel as part of a defined, separate cultural community with an historically grown identity, and extremely progressive people even deny that it makes sense to speak of "the occident" anymore, since Europeans fear the rejection of other cultures, and that these could feel not as equal. Instead Europeans claim to support universal, cuklture-independent values that nevertheless have been made possible to think about only in Europe and its past. What we claim to be "globalization" today, in the end is just an export of materiliasm and items and goods and pruction ways invented and formed up in Europe since no other culture was capable to get wher eEurope was and is - and one could argue that in the other parts of the world this percpetion of globaization by far is not that muc shared. Our export of our model to the whole world has more infuence and shaping power in other oarts of the world than our forefathers ever unfolded in formign energy during the age of collonialism!

That these other cultures on their part, China, Arabia, India, are not shy at all to nevertheless claim their individuatlity and superiority and their separate identity, gets comfortably ignored by occidentla self-deniars. We have started to renegotiate conflicts again that since decades, since generations have been considered to be left behind, and we must do so because it is the arrival of foreign, other cultures not sharing our values but questioning, even resisting to them , that force us to do it all again: apostcy, equality of women, humanistic values, law and order of the state, separation of legislation, jurisdiction, executive (that is what Bannon really is about, btw, since in many US departments this separation seems to be almost on-existent anymore), secularism, non-killing of homosexuals, etc. The others coming to us now force us to negotiate it all again since we do not dare to stand up for our own cultural identity and demanding them that if they want to live here they have to coply and followm our rules, else have to ge tout. And that we call progress? I call it self-deconstruction.

It is right our extreme individualism and freedom that has turned us into what we are today: well-meaning, but weak, shy of confronting others, shocked by the demand that we should define and defend our own cultural identity, and enraged by the demand that we should set us apart from other cultures and should understand that "we" are what we are last but not least because we are not what the others are. There cannot be any identity without discriminating between "me" and "not-me".And I have seen enough of the Middle East and NortAfrica and stayed there long enough to know that there is nothing that I would count as "me".
And so we dissolve ourselves.

Many of the philosophers and politicians of Rome aruund the fall of the first republic have left us comments and writings that reveal that they saw the very same things happening in their time as well. We could even see now that this helped to rise certain schools of thinking and philosophy that before were present but were just this: present as one branch amongst many others: the Stoa, for example, with its sometimes somewhat fatalistic attitude, which on the one hand may have helped to grow the feeling of social isolation, on the other hand the social isolation caused by the above mentioned factors and events fed back on the Stoa and strengthened it in return.

----

I think this is really hijacking this thread beyond all what is understandable, and I cannot and will not translate an over-500 pages book that presents and bases on plenty of historical and academic material and data. I therefore leave it to this now. I recommend that book once again, however, it is briliant in thought, data and argument. It leaves me white with envy when seeing how intelligent and smart some people are.

[Dowly]

I therefore leave it to this now.Fine by me. I find it hard to formulate any sort of answer to your arguments anyway, as they are not talked about in any of the books I've checked as major problems of the Republic. :doh:

I'll try to obtain a copy of Engels' book at some point to see what exactly is his argument.

[Skybird]

Fine by me. I find it hard to formulate any sort of answer to your arguments anyway, as they are not talked about in any of the books I've checked as major problems of the Republic. :doh:


Maybe the answers given by other authors are not necessarily always contradictive or wrong, but complementary?! ;) There certainly are aspects which Engels do not cover in his book, or only touches briefly, to outline a greater context, for exmaple the importance (and possible power-political abuse) of the free wheat rations that were distributed in Rome and that led to various conflicts between various influential office-holders and politicians. Although that again compares to the role of promises for social wellfare and redistribution of wealth in modern times, I would say.

Engels challenges some mainstream views of historians abotu Rome, yes, but when he does so, he marks that as such. Usually he just adds to the canon of what is agreed to be established knowledge in the academic community. But yes, some of what he says is a challenge indeed - and political dynamite, if it would show that he is right.

[Dowly]

Maybe the answers given by other authors are not necessarily always contradictive or wrong, but complementary?! ;)
That can, and often is the case. But the issues Engels raises about decline of Religion and migrant/freedmen appears, upon further bedtime reading, to be hard to prove or even unfounded.

On the decline of religion, Mary Beard in her book 'Religions of Rome Volume I' that any decline, or lack of, is nearly impossible to prove conclusively. She argues that contemporary sources shouldn't be taken literally, as there appears to be a considerable 'nostalgia' factor to them (Cicero) or bias (Augustine writers). Further, she gives evidence of founding of new and renovation of old temples during the 1st century BC, which would show that religion was not in decline. Lastly, she argues that for example the post of Flamen Dialis was left open, not because of decline of religion, but because of the disturbances of the 1st century BC. Other priests did the job of the priest of Jupiter, so there was no disturbance of religious ceremonies in that regard. She concludes that, while it is not possible to get a 100% picture of religion in the late Republic, in her view the decline is exaggerated.

In his book 'The Freedman in the Roman World', Henrik Mouritsen argues that there was no crisis caused by the release of slaves, and that Augustus' laws to curb this 'crisis' were "...peculiarly half-hearted and easily circumvented, and the mismatch between their supposed aims and actual content suggests they might be better understood as official declarations which emphasised the need for proper selection and ‘quality’ control in the manumission process."

and

"Augustus’ ambition to cut the number of freedmen has become a widely established ‘fact’, but the overall impact of his laws was probably modest. The limitations imposed on owners’ rights to free their slaves were to a great extent symbolic and would have done little to reduce the scale of manumission."

and

"While there is broad consensus on the background and motives of the Augustan reforms, most attempts at explaining the actual harm caused by freedmen have remained vague. Apart from the increased cost of the grain dole – which was solved by fixing the number of recipients – it is difficult to pinpoint any specific problems arising from manumission during the late republic."

[Skybird]

One would need to hear both authors debating that. There indeed were effortds and attempts, namely by Augustus, but also others, to artifically revive the Roman deities various cults, but int he whoe era the Mediterranean area was under growing and massive influence of Hellenism and Hellenimisation, which was not only obvious in the dominant role of Greek thinking and philosphy, but also language, which was most obvious in the rivalry between Latin and Greek as formal official language of Roman adminsitration, and Augustine and other even had to relase decrees forbidding Roman official governing provinces from speaking Greek during formal events although they were fluent in it. Nevertheless it led to a time, cant recall out of the blue when that was, when for quite some time all debates in the senate of Rome were held not in Latin but exclusively in Greek.

Various foreign cults were banned from Rome, when it already was so big a city that contemporary witnesses complained massively about the city and the world (outside) "no longer beign separate entities" and the foreign wys of life and foreign cults had out Roman identity uder immense pressure and made it falling back everywhere. Yes, later rulers tried to battle that, Cato the elder, Seneca, Livius and many others weep and complained about the loss of own culture, but we know how it all ended, finally, longer time later: a foreign relgion, Christianity, was declared the Roman state religion, to finally end the desintegrating of Roman identity but attempting to unite all people - by force - under one relgion and its identity-building influence again - no matter what religion or ideology that were. The cause justified the means.

On whether the Romans living before the fall of the republic indeed felt a bitter self-isolating or not, Engels explciitly wanrs of following the habit of the modenr present to just relabel the decline of Christian religion in Europe - a negative - as a cultural revitalizati0on and enrichment by foreign cultures that get met with even more enthusiasm in compensation for the denying of own identity. He criticises explicitly this tendency with many historians today, that the terms and conditojns of today's pltical correctness in langauge get assumed to be valid and alive 2000 years ago as well. We must see it through the Roman's eyes instead, from their point of view and in the context pof their time frame they lived in. Its very possible that the author you mentioned, Mary Beard, and Engels, would collide head-to-head here. With the quotrs of Henrik Mouritsen that you gave, Engels simply strongly seem to disagree, especially in the role of the wheat distrubution issues, and the impact of the exploding numbers of freed slaves, for which he refers to quite some contemporary witnesses and the written reports of state advisers and leaders alike.

[Jimbuna]

Arguably not officially terrorism -related but probably a part of the reason. Sweden are about to introduce conscription.

The Swedish government has decided to reintroduce military conscription - a move backed by the country's MPs.
The decision means that 4,000 men and women will be called up for service from 1 January 2018, a defence ministry spokeswoman told the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39140100

[Oberon]

I think it's less Terror and more Tu-22. :03:

[Skybird]

Arguably not officially terrorism -related but probably a part of the reason. Sweden are about to introduce conscription.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39140100

And Finland pushes its plannings for the case of a military conflict from current personnel level of 230 to 280 thousand, and raises defence spendings. The standing army in peace times has currently around 35 thousand.

[Jimbuna]

I think it's less Terror and more Tu-22. :03:

Yes, that as well quite possibly :yep:

And Finland pushes its plannings for the case of a military conflict from current personnel level of 230 to 280 thousand, and raises defence spendings. The standing army in peace times has currently around 35 thousand.

Aye, both Sweden and Finland appear to be moving more closely toward NATO.

[Dowly]

4,000 a year? Wow. :O:

[ikalugin]

I think it is more about trying to stop degradation of Swedish Armed Forces.

As to either joining NATO - it would decrease their security.

[mapuc]

The background is that the security situation in Sweden's immediate surroundings have deteriorated and the military have failed to recruit enough volunteers

Markus

[Oberon]

Sweden's immediate surroundings have deteriorated

Dowly is drunk again?

[mapuc]

Dowly is drunk again?

Between this line=read it as growing aggression/threat from Russia

That what they said on the Swedish news program Rapport.

They mentioned Russia a few times during the topic

Markus

[ikalugin]

Did they find that sub?

[Catfish]

Did they find that sub?

No, Russia is getting better :D

Seriously, i find those accusations of Russian subs repeatedly visiting swedish territorial waters ridiculous. If they can force one to the surface to prove the claim and present evidence, fine. If not..
"Well it could be, so lets raise the swedish defence budget!" right?
So much Nato subs trying to sneak in everywhere just for testing of course, but if you mention that you'd probably get shot, like Olof Palme.

- "The ‘Soviet’ U-boat scare that shook Sweden in the 80s was caused by US and UK subs that penetrated Swedish territorial waters disguised as Russian ones"
- "Swedish military were fully aware of these operations but did not report to Prime Minister, Olof Palme"
- "‘A year later, the social-democrat Olof Palme, who coined the notion ‘common security’, challenging Reagan’s cold war strategy, became the Swedish Prime Minister. Two weeks later, a periscope was detected in Swedish territorial waters…"
Honi soit qui mal y pense..

"The Deception Committee":
http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-nato-and-swedish-military-plotted-regime-change-in-sweden-in-1980s/5508970

[ikalugin]

To be honest I think it is less to do with the real military threat to Sweden and more to do with how badly Swedish Armed Forces fare now.

I mean there were time periods when Sweden did not have any tube artillery in it's usage. There are other areas such as the tube artillery that Sweden has severe problems with - for example in the Navy the corvettes did not receive their armament (AShMs and SAMs) making them really weak surface combatants.

[Oberon]

I see that they've announced the date for Kuznetsovs overhaul, $350m refit and improvement to the ISTAR ( intelligence, surveillance, targeting acquisition and reconnaissance) capability of the carrier. First half of this year apparently.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5_qBrIWgAAX66d.jpg

[Dowly]

Dowly is drunk again?I'm not drunk! :hmph:

[Jimbuna]

I'm surprised they aren't replacing her but I believe a new-build is being considered for commencement in 2025.

[ikalugin]

I'm surprised they aren't replacing her but I believe a new-build is being considered for commencement in 2025.
We have/had problems with the industrial capability and expertise to build a proper carrier as those were built originally in Nikolaev now Ukraine, Post 2020 it should get better with the new shipyards and expansion of the old shipyards.

I hope that the Kuznetsov refit and mid life repair would include new boilers and expansion of the hangar.

[Oberon]

I hope that the Kuznetsov refit and mid life repair would include new boilers and expansion of the hangar.

Same, particularly the former, he really does need them replacing, also the arresting cables could do with being looked at, two aircraft were lost in the Med because of faulty cables during the last patrol.

[Jimbuna]

Goes back to May last year...

“The modernization will focus on the aircraft carrier’s flight deck, including replacement of the deck covering, tailhooks, aircraft arresting gear and other elements of the take-off system.”

https://news.usni.org/2016/05/27/russia-modernize-lone-aircraft-carrier-next-year-new-carrier-start-2025

[ikalugin]

Same, particularly the former, he really does need them replacing, also the arresting cables could do with being looked at, two aircraft were lost in the Med because of faulty cables during the last patrol.
Kuznetsov not as much needs new boilers, they would just make life much simpler because their automatic control system would work instead of being set to a narrow set of optimal values. Smoke effects are sort of inevitable with the fuel oil that we use.

[Rockstar]

I see that they've announced the date for Kuznetsovs overhaul, $350m refit and improvement to the ISTAR ( intelligence, surveillance, targeting acquisition and reconnaissance) capability of the carrier. First half of this year apparently.

Well if those shipyard estimates are anything like they here you can double that figure and add 10% on top of that to give you a more realistic amount.

[Oberon]

Kuznetsov not as much needs new boilers, they would just make life much simpler because their automatic control system would work instead of being set to a narrow set of optimal values. Smoke effects are sort of inevitable with the fuel oil that we use.

Has consideration been given to switching to a reactor rather than fuel oil? Or is that something that might be going in for the next carrier design?

Well if those shipyard estimates are anything like they here you can double that figure and add 10% on top of that to give you a more realistic amount.

If they're lucky! :doh: :yep:

[ikalugin]

Has consideration been given to switching to a reactor rather than fuel oil? Or is that something that might be going in for the next carrier design?



If they're lucky! :doh: :yep:
No, as such a switch would be too hard/costly to make. We have much better boilers around, for example the ones we supplied to China on the Sovremeny series destroyers.

[Oberon]

That's fair, and for a small carrier fleet it's not really worth it I guess. I don't think we've used nuclear reactors for anything other than submarines in our fleet.


Anyway, change of subject slightly, to Best Korea™ and what's shaping up to be quite the ding-dong after Jong-Uns brother got a face full of VX. So Malaysia expelled the ambassador for the DPRK on Monday, and the DPRK decided that it would reply in kind...only to find out that the Malaysian ambassador had already left, so not to be outdone it banned all Malaysians from leaving Best Korea (around 7-9 in total at their embassy in Pyongyang), and now Malaysia has returned the favour by banning North Korean embassy staff and officials from leaving Malaysia (much to their relief no doubt).
This could turn out to be The Donalds first big crisis, if he can get away from Breitbart long enough to notice that it's happening...

[August]

This could turn out to be The Donalds first big crisis, if he can get away from Breitbart long enough to notice that it's happening...

So snarky you are.

[MaDef]

That's fair, and for a small carrier fleet it's not really worth it I guess. I don't think we've used nuclear reactors for anything other than submarines in our fleet.


Anyway, change of subject slightly, to Best Korea™ and what's shaping up to be quite the ding-dong after Jong-Uns brother got a face full of VX. So Malaysia expelled the ambassador for the DPRK on Monday, and the DPRK decided that it would reply in kind...only to find out that the Malaysian ambassador had already left, so not to be outdone it banned all Malaysians from leaving Best Korea (around 7-9 in total at their embassy in Pyongyang), and now Malaysia has returned the favour by banning North Korean embassy staff and officials from leaving Malaysia (much to their relief no doubt).
This could turn out to be The Donalds first big crisis, if he can get away from Breitbart long enough to notice that it's happening... I gotta ask.... Unless North Korea starts throwing missiles around willy nilly, Why would it be a crisis that the U.S. needs to be involved in?

[Nippelspanner]

Wasn't the topic more or less this?
http://i.imgur.com/f1Fpb9D.jpg

Instead the pages are filling with ot material about a better museum ship...

[Oberon]

I gotta ask.... Unless North Korea starts throwing missiles around willy nilly, Why would it be a crisis that the U.S. needs to be involved in?

Like you say, depends on whether the DPRK starts doing something more stupid than it's doing right now.

Wasn't the topic more or less this?


Instead the pages are filling with ot material about a better museum ship...

Well, I didn't think there was much point in starting a new thread about Pyongyang, and with the Kuznetsov, well he was involved in Syrian ops which gives it a bit of a link to Terrorism.
I just can't be arsed with starting 'The All Purpose Russian Thread' or 'The All Purpose North Korean Thread' so I throw them in here.
Besides, it's been a while since someone has Allahu-Ackbared themselves in a western nation so news has been slow, I'm sure that'll change soon though, but in the meantime we can content ourselves with Kims garbage and Russias refits.

[Jimbuna]

I gotta ask.... Unless North Korea starts throwing missiles around willy nilly, Why would it be a crisis that the U.S. needs to be involved in?

US starts deploying advanced anti-missile system THAAD in South Korea after defiant North's latest test.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang repeated China's resolute opposition to THAAD, saying the country would take the steps necessary to protect its security interests.

He said: “The consequences of this are on the shoulders of the United States and South Korea. We again strongly urge the relevant sides to stop the deployment process and not keep going down the wrong path.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/us-starts-deploying-anti-missile-system-thaad-south-korea-defiant/

[Oberon]

Yeah, it's a bit like the plan to put that anti-missile radar system in Poland, and how that made Moscow just so happy.

[ikalugin]

Yeah, it's a bit like the plan to put that anti-missile radar system in Poland, and how that made Moscow just so happy.
Yea, PRC is unhappy. I mean US is developing a consistent first strike capability between the modernisation of nuclear arsenal, ABM and cyber, smaller nuclear powers such as PRC should be even more concerned than established ones.

[Nippelspanner]

Besides, it's been a while since someone has Allahu-Ackbared themselves in a western nation

"A man wielding a machete charges guests at the Louvre while shouting 'Allah Akbar!'".
Paris, 3 February 2017.
(no fatalities, so not worth reporting much in this pc-world I assume.)

[Oberon]

"A man wielding a machete charges guests at the Louvre while shouting 'Allah Akbar!'".
Paris, 3 February 2017.
(no fatalities, so not worth reporting much in this pc-world I assume.)

And you didn't post about this then because....?

[Oberon]

Yea, PRC is unhappy. I mean US is developing a consistent first strike capability between the modernisation of nuclear arsenal, ABM and cyber, smaller nuclear powers such as PRC should be even more concerned than established ones.

What do you define as a 'First strike capability' though? If you mean the ability to launch an attack and then defeat the retaliatory attack then yes, that is a potential scenario for China that the US is developing with its advancing ABM system. If you mean a 'Bolt out of the blue' scenario then that's not so much because China is deploying the Changcheng system which is similar to the Oko system I imagine, or at least somewhere between Oko and EKS. So they'll pick up the IR plume from any land based launches, and indeed sea based ones if the satellite has a wide enough coverage.
The PRC is at a definite disadvantage because of its small SSBN fleet, so retaliatory options would be primarily land based, which THAAD is designed to counter. However, the PRC isn't toothless, it also has ABM systems, let's not forget that it took out an old satellite a few years back, so it has the technology, even though it's fairly early in design, and it has enough missiles that it could, in theory, saturate the US ABM system, just like the Soviet ASM doctrine was to saturate the AEGIS defence with enough missiles that one or two would get through, and it only takes one or two to hit their targets to cause millions of fatalities. Let's not forget, there are no winners, even if the US manages to hit every Chinese population center over 100,000 people, if it loses most of the western seaboard in return then it's a pyrrhic victory at best (although more than a few Americans may celebrate the destruction of California...in fact, I would put money on some pastor in the Mid-West drawing similarities with Sodom and Gomorrah).
and would be a massive drain on the US economy, if not the death knell to it. Although since China would at this point have gone back to warring tribes then it could hardly claim to be the victor in the fight. Of course, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, maybe Vietnam and the Phillipines would also have suffered from the collateral, because if the PRC is going down you can bet that it'll take all of its surrounding opponents down with it, especially Japan. Meanwhile North Korea will probably be in the process of fighting the South because the destruction of China means that the DPRK is next on the target list. The DPRK will lose this fight, but the resulting cost to the South Korean economy and society, especially if a Chinese warhead happens to find its way into Seoul, would basically knock it out for a generation.

Europe though, providing that some nations don't take the opportunity of the US being distracted to settle some old scores, would probably come out of this relatively intact, but the economy of most economically advanced nations would be in the dustbin.

[Nippelspanner]

And you didn't post about this then because....?

...because I am not responsible for posting Muslim terror attacks? I mean, if you pay me for it, I'd consider it. We're talking a full time job here after all.

More important is why you seem to ignore attacks like that and claim that " nothing happened recently.
Before that attack, there was a similar one in Germany this year already.
Reminds me of your post where you claimed no Muslims are roaming the streets of London decapitation people - when exactly that happened and was attempted multiple times.
I also don't see why only attacks in Europe seem to count. It is the all purpose terrorism thread - nothing suggests it's only about Europe, or the west.

And instead of actual terror related things, like the 140+ attacks in Allah's name in the past 30 days(!), people are armchair general'ing about the Kuznetsov...

[Oberon]

...because I am not responsible for posting Muslim terror attacks? I mean, if you pay me for it, I'd consider it. We're talking a full time job here after all.

More important is why you seem to ignore attacks like that and claim that " nothing happened recently.
Before that attack, there was a similar one in Germany this year already.
Reminds me of your post where you claimed no Muslims are roaming the streets of London decapitation people - when exactly that happened and was attempted multiple times.
I also don't see why only attacks in Europe seem to count. It is the all purpose terrorism thread - nothing suggests it's only about Europe, or the west.

And instead of actual terror related things, like the 140+ attacks in Allah's name in the past 30 days(!), people are armchair general'ing about the Kuznetsov...

Well, if you feel that emotive about it then I expect that you'll keep us all up to date on every single Muslim transgression within Europe, won't you?
Don't forget to make sure it's not 'fake news'. :yep:

[Nippelspanner]

So you do not care about the fact that Muslim terror attacks cost human lives daily?
Indeed it provokes emotions for me.
See a shrink if it leaves you cold.

Also, Skybird did report it - and you as well - lol.

[Oberon]

So you do not care about the fact that Muslim terror attacks cost human lives daily?
Indeed it provokes emotions for me.
See a shrink if it leaves you cold.

Also, Skybird did report it - and you as well - lol.

It bothers me as much as the people who die daily from cancer, car accidents, heart attacks and all the other ways that kill millions more people a year than terrorism does.

Well, there you go then, we reported it and we moved on to talk about other things. It didn't really stick in my mind because it was a small, isolated incident, the sort of thing that happens all over the world but for a multitude of reasons, sometimes related to Islam, and sometimes not (http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/05/us/washington-sikh-shooting/).
I mean, look, if it upsets you so much that we don't necessarily stay on topic in this thread then you can start up an 'All Purpose Russia' thread, and an 'All Purpose China' thread, and an 'All Purpose DPRK' thread, and an 'All Purpose Syrian' thread if you like.

[Nippelspanner]

It bothers me as much as the people who die daily from cancer, car accidents, heart attacks and all the other ways that kill millions more people a year than terrorism does.
Wow. Mind blown.


Well, there you go then, we reported it and we moved on to talk about other things. It didn't really stick in my mind because it was a small, isolated incident, the sort of thing that happens all over the world but for a multitude of reasons
So what now, either it's isolated or not, you can't have it both ways.
And these kind of attacks are FAR from isolated. The only time they are, is when they're not related to Islam, the religion of peace and tolerance.

[MaDef]

US starts deploying advanced anti-missile system THAAD in South Korea after defiant North's latest test.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang repeated China's resolute opposition to THAAD, saying the country would take the steps necessary to protect its security interests.

He said: “The consequences of this are on the shoulders of the United States and South Korea. We again strongly urge the relevant sides to stop the deployment process and not keep going down the wrong path.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/us-starts-deploying-anti-missile-system-thaad-south-korea-defiant/ Isn't that a different issue aside from the squabble between Malaysia & North Korea?

But, speaking to the Chinese being upset over the missile deployments, maybe it's time China attempted to reign in North Korea a little.

[Bilge_Rat]

terrorist attacks by Radical Islamic Terrorists occur pretty much everyday.

There was an attack on Sunday by Radical Islamic Terrorists that killed 11 Malian peacekeepers:


At least 11 soldiers from the Malian army were killed and four wounded after a group of armed men attacked the military post in the Malian village of Boulikessi, located on the border with Burkina Faso, on Sunday 5 March.

RFI reported the attackers arrived on a motorcycle and on board at least two vehicles before gunshots were heard and vehicles burned. Other soldiers were able to return to Burkina Faso.

French forces engaged in the anti-insurgent Operation Barkhane sent helicopters to Boulikessi, according to two military sources quoted by RFI.

Security sources have attributed the attack to a jihadist group led by a Burkinabe radical preacher, Ibrahim Malam Dicko, which has recently been conducting operations in both countries.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/least-11-dead-terror-attack-army-post-mali-1609904

Did I mention this terror attack was carried out by Radical Islamic Terrorists?

[Schroeder]

To keep this on track... A German hostage was beheaded by Abbu Sayaff on 02.27.2017:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/27/asia/philippines-german-behead-abu-sayyaf/index.html

Religion of Peace.:yeah:

[Nippelspanner]

Did I mention this terror attack was carried out by Radical Islamic Terrorists?
You sure?
Sounds like fake news.
Islam means peace afterall.
Oh wait, I got it: "no real Muslims!!1“

What a coincidence attacks are nearly exclusively committed in the name of this peaceful, modern, just and open minded idea, isn't it...

[Oberon]

Isn't that a different issue aside from the squabble between Malaysia & North Korea?

But, speaking to the Chinese being upset over the missile deployments, maybe it's time China attempted to reign in North Korea a little.

That would be nice. That being said, they are trying, they banned DPRK exports of coal a few weeks back which really upset the DPRK because that's one of their major income sources.


So what now, either it's isolated or not, you can't have it both ways.
And these kind of attacks are FAR from isolated. The only time they are, is when they're not related to Islam, the religion of peace and tolerance.

Well, sure, these attacks are connected because the people who commit them purport to be followers of Islam. That's a connection.
11,774 people were killed because of Islamic Terror Attacks last year, about of 54.3 million other deaths. That's 0.021% of all global deaths.
Furthermore, if you were to take a look at the ethnicity and religion of the people who were killed by these attacks, I think you'd find that they were predominantly Arab Muslim, in short, you're more likely to die from Islamic terrorism if you're a follower of Islam.
It's am emotive subject, even more so if you or someone who know has been affected by it, that's exactly why they do it, to get a response, but statistically speaking, death by Islamic terrorism is a global drop in the ocean. You're more likely to be killed by lightning, or murdered because someone didn't like the way you looked at them than you are to be killed by a Muslim. That's a fact.

https://www.techjuice.pk/a-data-scientist-explains-odds-of-dying-in-a-terrorist-attack/

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/nice-attack-do-you-feel-like-youre-more-likely-than-ever-to-be-hit-by-a-terror-attack-this-is-why-a7140396.html

http://uk.businessinsider.com/death-risk-statistics-terrorism-disease-accidents-2017-1?r=US&IR=T

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa798_1_1.pdf

[ikalugin]

@Oberon, let me expand my point. First strike capability developed by the US has several important components:

1) counter-force capability, that is the capability to destroy the enemy nuclear forces before launch. This includes now only the nuclear weapons themselves and their delivery systems but, for example, command and control means. That capability is achieved by the use of new, more precise nuclear weapons (modernised warheads and free-fall bombs) and improved non nuclear weapons (cruise missiles, stealth bombers).
2) fast attack capability, this is the capability to conduct a counter-force strike rapidly. This capability is achieved primarily via the use of SLBMs launched from forward positions and on shallow trajectories.
3) defensive capability to protect against the remaining enemy delivery systems.
4) other means to disrupt hostile reponse (cyber) and to support the strike (comms, networking)

In terms of PRC specific scenarios you imply that Chinese ABM is orders of magnitude more capable than the US ABM as not only can it protect against the first strike (which is apriori more powerfull than the second strike all things being the same) but that it will be able to defend against such a strike while US ABM won't be able to defend against the PRC's second strike.

Considering how US is (far) ahead both in terms of strategic offensive weapons and deployed ABM I would say that the situation is quite the opposite - Chinese ABM would not be capable of doing much to the American first strike, while US ABM would be capable of intercepting a weak Chinese response.

On the US ABM - the core concern there is not THAAD, it is Aegis, which is scalable and capable something say our ABM (ie A135M) is not (it is not scalable and is limited in capability).

[Oberon]

To keep this on track... A German hostage was beheaded by Abbu Sayaff on 02.27.2017:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/27/asia/philippines-german-behead-abu-sayyaf/index.html

Religion of Peace.:yeah:

Aye, poor sod. Bit of a Catch-22 there, pay up and risk him being killed anyway, or refuse to pay and have him definitely die.




Keeping this on track too, a Sikh man was shot in the US two days ago whilst working on his truck in the driveway, a man wearing a mask walked up to him, told him to go back to his own country and then shot him.
Then, of course, there was the Indian man who was killed and two others wounded late last month when a gunman walked into a bar in Kansas and yelled 'Get out of my country' and opened fire.

[ikalugin]

On first strike stuff - the time line for the warhead upgrade decision is interesting, as it correlates with the time line for the new-start agreement. This means that we cannot be certain behind the long term US intent, as they were improving their first strike capability significantly despite disarmament agreements.

[Oberon]

@Oberon, let me expand my point. First strike capability developed by the US has several important components:

1) counter-force capability, that is the capability to destroy the enemy nuclear forces before launch. This includes now only the nuclear weapons themselves and their delivery systems but, for example, command and control means. That capability is achieved by the use of new, more precise nuclear weapons (modernised warheads and free-fall bombs) and improved non nuclear weapons (cruise missiles, stealth bombers).

Stealth bombers are the biggest advantage the US has in that department, no-one quite has the same capability at the moment, however they're not perfect and IIRC Russia has developed means to improve detecting them, and if Russia has then China probably has too, so there would be attritional losses. However, to deliver those warheads to the weapons and the delivery systems, as well as the command and control, you've got to launch them, and that's the element of surprise lost, and as soon as China sees the US launching at them and confirms the trajectory they will launch back.


2) fast attack capability, this is the capability to conduct a counter-force strike rapidly. This capability is achieved primarily via the use of SLBMs launched from forward positions and on shallow trajectories.

Yes, this is the big one, the decapitation strike. This is the sort of thing that 'Dead Hand' was built to try and neutralise. However, this requires a lot of very precise strikes, the US has 14 SSBNs, with 24 Trident IIs per boat, and around 12 warheads per missile, that's 288 warheads for a first strike, and this trajectory has to be shallow which limits the range otherwise it's going to get detected on radar and the missiles will be launched. It's also got to get every single last bit of command and control as well as the missile launch facilities themselves, otherwise the missiles will launch.
It's a lot of jobs for 288 warheads.

3) defensive capability to protect against the remaining enemy delivery systems.


This we agree on, the ABM shield does give the US an advantage, but it's not foolproof and depending on how many missiles and warheads get launched, it can and will let some through.

4) other means to disrupt hostile reponse (cyber) and to support the strike (comms, networking)

I think everyone is getting in on that one. China has some good anti-satellite weaponry though.

In terms of PRC specific scenarios you imply that Chinese ABM is orders of magnitude more capable than the US ABM as not only can it protect against the first strike (which is apriori more powerfull than the second strike all things being the same) but that it will be able to defend against such a strike while US ABM won't be able to defend against the PRC's second strike.

Not really, the Chinese will come off worse in any exchange, I made that fairly clear, they'd be nuked back to tribal warfare, but the US would not emerge without a scratch either, and neither will any of the PRCs neighbours. Now if this is a victory then it's a pyrrhic one.

Considering how US is (far) ahead both in terms of strategic offensive weapons and deployed ABM I would say that the situation is quite the opposite - Chinese ABM would not be capable of doing much to the American first strike, while US ABM would be capable of intercepting a weak Chinese response.


Depends on how strong or weak the response is, China has around 300 warheads, and around 400 missiles. Most are road mobile, although I dare say like in Russia, they usually stick them in or around their depots before dispersing them in wartime. Don't forget also the underground systems that they have such as the 'Underground Great Wall of China' which would hide out a lot of their systems from first wave attacks.


On the US ABM - the core concern there is not THAAD, it is Aegis, which is scalable and capable something say our ABM (ie A135M) is not (it is not scalable and is limited in capability).

AEGIS is good, but not infallable, the key would be to make sure you launch more missiles than the AEGIS system has SM-3s to intercept with. Scatter the warheads nuclear and non-nuclear and so the launcher has no idea which missiles to prioritise and one or two should get through. If you have a surplus of nukes then you can just put a warhead on all of them and then one will definitely get through. That has been the key weakness on the AEGIS and CIWS technology which, I'll admit, is slowly getting fixed. After all, why did the Oscar II have so many vertical launch tubes? To overwhelm the defence system of the US carrier group allowing at least one nuclear tipped cruise missile to penetrate the screen and devastate the formation.

Of course, that was a few decades ago, the systems that they're developing for the next couple of decades will close that hole, particularly when we get things like lasers and railguns in.
The only thing that the PRC and Russia can do in response is to develop their anti-missile systems to counter it.

[Oberon]

That's me done for the moment, got other things to do.

In regards to Islam, feel free to freak out over it, I've been surprised that you've all been so quiet since late last year, was beginning to worry, but now normal service has been resumed. :up:

[Nippelspanner]

11,774 people were killed because of Islamic Terror Attacks last year, about of 54.3 million other deaths. That's 0.021% of all global deaths.
Try to double that death toll, then you're much closer to the truth.
But that doesn't even matter. 11000 or 22000 - in the end too many people have to die due to that hateful ideology, while your stance is "*shrug* people more often die of cancer - let's therefore ignore the murderous ideology responsible which is causing more and more deaths."
I literally don't even...


Furthermore, if you were to take a look at the ethnicity and religion of the people who were killed by these attacks, I think you'd find that they were predominantly Arab Muslim, in short, you're more likely to die from Islamic terrorism if you're a follower of Islam.
Yes, so? Does the ethnicity matter to you? Why?
The knife wielding killers simply do what their book commands. A Muslim who doesn't join the jihad is a "hypocrite" who shall be persecuted just like the non believers... And I don't need to remind you what the Quran has in petto for these guys, do I?


You're more likely to be killed by lightning, or murdered because someone didn't like the way you looked at them than you are to be killed by a Muslim. That's a fact.

No, that's either not understanding statistics, or deliberately twisting them to support your own bias.
What is a fact is, that your chance to die of Muslim terrorism/violence is close to 100% - if you just roam the streets of some nice places - while it is basically 0% if you're living with the inuit.

The problem, and danger, is very real, it all just depends. The point is also not "can it happen to me?" but rather: "why is it happening at all and what can we do about it?".
What had been "isolated incidents" pre-911, are now daily incidents on every continent of this globe. And instead of trying to fix it, or at least protect us, we fall for Muslim taqqiyah strategies and actually believe all the nonsense ranging from "religion of peace" over "no true Muslim" to "isolated incidents", while bodies pile up left and right.

That's a tragedy. And by being that stupid, maybe we deserve being either submitted to Islamic rule, or beheaded.
Allahu Akbar!

[mapuc]

I'm so tired

I'm so tired hearing some people keep on saying it has nothing to do with Islam-When those who commit these terror is from Islam or base their terror on the Quran.

I'm tired of hearing people saying that Islamic terror has killed less people than other cases-When their terror has changed a countries politics, like Sweden and Denmark-Today NO news paper dare to post critical articles about Islam or dare to post picture. Those Politicians and officials that have the guts to openly criticize Islam is living under protection 24/7
(They write critical article about ISIS, but not about the ideology Islam, not the mainstream media that is)

It's no problems criticizing the bible or those who believe in this and it's not a problem burning a bible-That's alright, but burning a Quran wow that's blasphemy-A man from Denmark have been accused of just that, for having burned a Holy Quran in his backyard, while another person didn't for having burn the bible a few years earlier.

I don't know how it is in England or Germany

I can also tell you that I'm 110 % sure that if there is a terror attack or two in Denmark or Sweden our Constitutional rights will be changed. Everything to accommodate Islam and its fanatics-
"Yea your right and I get peace"

I'm sorry, if I may have stepped on someone's toes.

Markus

[Nippelspanner]

Not mine for sure, excellent post, really.
You're unfortunately spot on.

[mapuc]

Not mine for sure, excellent post, really.
You're unfortunately spot on.

Thank you

I can add something more to this

Take a look at this famous French satirical magazine(forgot its name), that some years ago hadn't any problems making fun of any religion in the world-A few radical Islamic terrorist changed that-after this terrible attack-They have no problems making fun with any religion-except Islam.

So a few Islamic fantics could change a magazines view on religion-by killing some of the employees.
(this was told by one of our mainstream newspaper-
"They will keep on taking on religion with a sense of humour, except Islam. which is after this terrible attack banned"

Markus

[Oberon]

Try to double that death toll, then you're much closer to the truth.

I got it from thereligionofpeace.com, but fair enough.

But that doesn't even matter. 11000 or 22000 - in the end too many people have to die due to that hateful ideology, while your stance is "*shrug* people more often die of cancer - let's therefore ignore the murderous ideology responsible which is causing more and more deaths."
I literally don't even...What's your answer then? How do you get rid of a religion of 1.6 billion people then? Any thoughts?

Yes, so? Does the ethnicity matter to you? Why?
The knife wielding killers simply do what their book commands. A Muslim who doesn't join the jihad is a "hypocrite" who shall be persecuted just like the non believers... And I don't need to remind you what the Quran has in petto for these guys, do I?So what's the excitement about? You live in Germany, not Baghdad.

No, that's either not understanding statistics, or deliberately twisting them to support your own bias.
What is a fact is, that your chance to die of Muslim terrorism/violence is close to 100% - if you just roam the streets of some nice places - while it is basically 0% if you're living with the inuit.Now you're not understanding statistics or deliberately twisting them to support your own bias. Seriously...a hundred percent? Are you telling me if I walk into, say, Malmo in Sweden I'll be instantly killed the second I walk into the street? Nonsense, in fact the only time that the possibility of being killed by a Muslim is one hundred percent is when you're within the lethal radius on a Muslim carrying out an attack. Not even in the middle of Mosul is it one hundred percent, so don't be so dramatic.

Global statistics are a fact, last year 54.3 million people died on planet Earth, fact. Out of those deaths, according to thereligionofpeace.com, 11,774 were as a result of Islamic terrorism, or indeed, just Islam in general considering that the first entry on the list was a model strangled to death by her brother, not exactly terrorism, but that's fine, we'll keep it on the list because the point still stands, it is a very, very, very low percentage of global deaths, and yet it has a massive impact on everyone. Why is this? Why have we let a cause of death which is about as likely to happen as being killed by your own furniture (http://www.lifeinsurancequotes.org/additional-resources/deadly-statistics/)become almost the ruler of our lives?
Why are we all so scared? When we're far more likely to be killed by our car or an aircraft than a Muslim?

Oh, I hear you say, but that's globally, it's different from country to country. Fair enough, so let's take that beacon of stability, Iraq, and see what happens there. Ok, Iraq has a death rate (which has been decreasing steadily, by the way) of 3.8 people per 1000 population, its population is 33.42 million, so that's approximately 126,996 people died last year in Iraq, if you have more precise figures than that, please do post them.
According to IraqBodyCount.com, the amount of people who died due to terrorist activity in Iraq last year was 16,393, which is 12%. So you're right in that if you go to certain places you do increase your chances of dying from Islamic terror, but not to 100%, otherwise the death count would have been 126,996, not 16,393.
At the other end of the spectrum, let's take Germany. I'll use religionofpeace.com for this one as conveniently they have a section for Europe and a section for America. So, in 2016 15 people were killed in Germany because of Islam, although I see a Daily Mail headline saying 22 were killed (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4052696/Germany-s-year-hell-country-rocked-seven-terror-attacks-leaving-22-dead.html) so let's take the higher number. Now, Germany has a death rate of 11.6 per 1000 population (which caught me off guard to begin with, but then I figured that it's because of the aging population, in short, you've got a lot of elderly people) which with Germanys population of 82,175,700 (in December 2015) means that approximately 953,238 people died in Germany in 2016. Which means that out of all the people who died in Germany last year 0.002% of them died from Islam.
While I'm here and especially for mapuc, I'll do Denmark!
Again, I'll use religionofpeace for 2016, and that shows me that no-one died from Islam in Denmark last year, but 3 were injured. Denmark has a death rate of 10.3 per 1000 people, so with a population of 5,614,000 that's 57824 people who died, which means that out of all the people who died in Denmark last year 0% of them died from Islam.

The problem, and danger, is very real, it all just depends. Absolutely, if you're in the middle of Iraq or Syria, the danger is definitely there. Western Europe? Not as much. There are much bigger dangers in Western Europe than Islamic terrorists, other Western Europeans for example. You're more likely to die at the hands of another German than you are at the hands of an Islamic terrorist.

The point is also not "can it happen to me?" but rather: "why is it happening at all and what can we do about it?". Bingo. That is a very good question, but everyone has a different answer. Ranging from 'nothing' to 'kill them all'. My particular take is that we need to remain vigilant, but not make more enemies and increase the difficulty of the task we have. Recognise that this is a problem within Islam, and help them solve it rather than to dictate to them 'Be this way or else'.
Above all, we must not let the terrorists win, we must not let them terrorise us, which means that we must realise that as things are their direct threat to each and every one of us in the western world is nowhere near as large as we think it is. They are the boogeyman under the bed, and sure there is a threat out there and our security services have been dealing with it, and they have dealt with it in such a successful manner that the death by terrorism rate in Europe is extremely low when compared to, say, the Middle East. Believe it or not, even with the spikes in recent years, the deaths from terrorism death rate is still lower than it was before 9/11.

http://www.datagraver.com/thumbs/1300x1300r/2016-12/terrorism20161219.png

What had been "isolated incidents" pre-911, are now daily incidents on every continent of this globe. And instead of trying to fix it, or at least protect us, we fall for Muslim taqqiyah strategies and actually believe all the nonsense ranging from "religion of peace" over "no true Muslim" to "isolated incidents", while bodies pile up left and right.

That's a tragedy. And by being that stupid, maybe we deserve being either submitted to Islamic rule, or beheaded.
Allahu Akbar!And now comes the emotion. I get it, you're scared, most of Europe is scared because wherever we turn we see more news about Islam doing something bad, or people dying because of terrorism. We see the smaller picture, we see what we are told to see. If you step back for a moment and look at the bigger picture, as I am trying to show here, you see a different thing altogether.
Yes, there is a problem, I'm not going to deny that, but what I am going to do is put that problem within its correct context in a world full of problems, rather than take some knee-jerk reactionary movement based on emotions of fear and terror.
Radical Islam doesn't want people to think rationally, surely even you can agree with me on that, right? So why give into their game?

[Oberon]

They have no problems making fun with any religion-except Islam.

So a few Islamic fantics could change a magazines view on religion-by killing some of the employees.
(this was told by one of our mainstream newspaper-
"They will keep on taking on religion with a sense of humour, except Islam. which is after this terrible attack banned"

Markus

Well, then your mainstream newspaper is wrong, because Charlie Hebdo has carried on taking on everyone they see fit to do so even after the attacks. Heck, did you not even see the first issue of Charlie Hebdo after the attacks, it had Muhammad on the front cover! :har:

I find some of Charlie Hebdos graphics to be distasteful but that's how you do it, you don't let them win.

[Oberon]

Tell you what Nippelspanner, let's just both walk away from this one, by all means reply to my post but let's just end it there, ok? I spent about an hour typing that, and I don't fancy deleting it (although I can if you want) and honestly...I think we both have better uses of our time than to spend it on here, doing this, achieving absolutely nothing.

So I concede. In regards to the off-topic discussions, if that's a big enough problem then Jim can shut this thread down, delete the off-topic stuff and then open it again (and put 'Islamic' in front of Terrorism if that makes things better).

[ikalugin]

Oberon, you are poorly informed. With the new warheads US has the capability to destroy the entirety of non survivable target set (silos, bases, infrastructure) of PRC's nuclear triad (and even Russian nuclear triad). So it is not as much a decapitation strike anymore as a simple counterforce one.

The few Chinese delivery systems and warheads that would suvive (PRC doesnt operate many road mobile ICBMs and you should not mix the ICBMs with IRBMs/MRBMs/SRBMs that they do have in good numbers) would not penetrate the US ABM, as such system even without the first strike would have several interceptors per inbound warhead.

In fact the capability of Russian second strike, with Russian arsenal being orders of magnitude more capable than Chinese (or any nation outside of bilateral Russia-US relationship) is now under question between the improved counter force and ABM capabilities of US are considered.

This leads to strategic nuclear instability, which is very, very bad as the only reasonable way to ensure a second strike is to set posture to the launch on warning/launch on attack which, coupled with temporary weakeness of Russian EW systems (and lack of such systems in Chinese use at this time) means that if an accident happens (such as the launch of a sounding rocket in Norway in 90s) it can lead to a launch.

[Nippelspanner]

I got it from thereligionofpeace.com, but fair enough.

Same here. Just checked again and in 2016, over 21000 people died due to Islamic Terror Attacks.


What's your answer then? How do you get rid of a religion of 1.6 billion people then? Any thoughts?
Man I wish, but in the end it isn't possible. Once any ideology has infiltrated the people of a country, you can't just get rid of it and the more you'd try, the more they would resist - naturally.
The damage is done and I'm afraid, can't be fixed anymore. The only chance I'd see would be a reformation of Islam, hoping that the younger Muslim generations will indeed create an ideology with less... Problems.
But how realistic is that? Not at all i fear.


So what's the excitement about? You live in Germany, not Baghdad.
Yeah, and good thing I didn't go to the Weihnachtsmarkt this year, aye?
I get your point, but I start to suspect you ignore mine.
First, the chance that something happens isn't important. Important is the fact that this unnecessary threat exists at all. That's enough to be "excited" about for my standards.
Additionally and most importantly - this isn't about ME. This nearly affects every single human being.


Now you're not understanding statistics or deliberately twisting them to support your own bias. Seriously...a hundred percent? Are you telling me if I walk into, say, Malmo in Sweden I'll be instantly killed the second I walk into the street?
No, that isn't what I said at all, this is what you wish I would have said. Big difference.
I said the chance depends on where you are.
Be a gay person in Iran and say out loud that Mohammed has sex with donkeys and that you love a man's buns and let's see how long it takes until you get hanged at some street lantern. Wanna bet that your chance of survival is next to 0?
Do the same among a tribe of inuit - they probably would just shake their heads and receive a huge culture shock. But nothing would happen, would it?

That's why these statistics are nonsensical and irrelevant. What is relevant is that people need to think twice before they attend public events, for example. And mot even that alone. On top you gotta keep in mind that some machete -mohammed might cut some people down in some city today, because Allah is so incredibly akbar.
Yes, the fact that this happens, excites me indeed. Oh what an islamophobe I must be, daring to worry about rising threads in the name of this ideology...



Nonsense, in fact the only time that the possibility of being killed by a Muslim is one hundred percent is when you're within the lethal radius on a Muslim carrying out an attack.
Yeah no s.... Sherlock!?
Good thing there never are any attacks anywhere... Oh wait.


We see the smaller picture, we see what we are told to see. If you step back for a moment and look at the bigger picture, as I am trying to show here, you see a different thing altogether.
Speak for yourself only, please - or at least mot for me.
I agree, you do seem to see the smaller picture. You look at a stupid statistic telling you "oh, no worries, your chances to die because of a machete is slim" and the problem is no big deal. After all, "what's all the excitement about?"...

What I, as a "hateful islamophobe" worry about is the FUTURE of mankind, with a totalitarian ideology that only knows oppression and terror, growing stronger each day, getting more aggressive and merciless from attack to attack.

More Islam, more problems. That is also an undeniable global fact, just like the numbers I told you last year, the ones you always ignored because they are too inconvenient. ;)