French church attacked by terrorists

[Craig B]

But that's looking at it with an Enlightenment mindset

For ISIS motivation you need to be more traditional

http://www.ancient.eu/Assyrian_Warfare/

Are you hallucinating?

I destroyed, devastated, and burned with fire" those cities, towns, and regions which resisted Assyrian rule.​

How about:

Two of my few operatives acting in a foreign city privily entered a temple and slaughtered an old priest. They were at once slain by enemy warriors. When I heard about this, I sought to make propaganda of it.​

Is that really how the Assyrians conquered their empire? I don't think so.

Do you think the French people are fools, or that they are likely to surrender in the face of such tauntingly provocative displays of criminality? Let's try. If that had happened in your home town, would you now be so afraid that you would recommend surrender of your country to ISIS? I will not presume to accuse you of such idiocy.

 

[Craig B]

The problem is ideology - Islam.

... Note: That's very different to simply attributing it to Islam.

Is this some sort of Zen koan thing?

 

[McHrozni]

Are you hallucinating?

I destroyed, devastated, and burned with fire" those cities, towns, and regions which resisted Assyrian rule.​

How about:

Two of my few operatives acting in a foreign city privily entered a temple and slaughtered an old priest. They were at once slain by enemy warriors. When I heard about this, I sought to make propaganda of it.​

Is that really how the Assyrians conquered their empire? I don't think so.

They weren't exactly the only ones in history to use the strategy of brutalizing those who resisted them to great effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carthage_(c._149_BC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(AD_70)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kiev_(1240)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Baghdad_(1258)

Just a few well-known examples, history is full of them.

Do you think the French people are fools, or that they are likely to surrender in the face of such tauntingly provocative displays of criminality? Let's try. If that had happened in your home town, would you now be so afraid that you would recommend surrender of your country to ISIS? I will not presume to accuse you of such idiocy.

ISIS might, although their motive is more likely to provoke backlash against Muslims in France, in order to make this a war of civilizations that they think they can win.

Once (and not so much if, unfortunately) they succeed, I think they will consider this a bit of a folly. You can't usually fight nations who have the ability to destroy entire civilizations within half an hour with knives and lorries very well. Historically gross inferiority in weapons rarely resulted in a victory for the inferior party, and their inferiority in weapons is somewhat more extreme than it ever has been in human history.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

Yes, it seems entirely plausible to me. The underlying principle of this type of terrorist campaign is to associate a brutal civilian cost with a target's traditional military operations. At first, of course, it will strengthen resolve. But the goal is, with time and persistence, civilian populations will turn against their leadership for "provoking" these horrifying terrorist attacks with their "meddling", and demand an end to it.

There is ample and justified cause to oppose the insane invasions of various countries already undertaken by Western powers, which are already unpopular.

In these circumstances it would make sense for ISIS to depict itself, and Muslims in western countries, as innocent victims of unwarranted western aggression. Instead they initiate a showy programme of provocative atrocities. Or encourage insane bigots to commit outrages, and then approve them.

Now, tell me why, unless it is to enhance public hostility and support for further military action in the Middle East, and to encourage persecution and repression of Muslims in the West.

Let's try again. How many atrocious murders will persuade you to demand that your government surrender to ISIS out of terror, as has been suggested here?

 

[Craig B]

They weren't exactly the only ones in history to use the strategy of brutalizing those who resisted them to great effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carthage_(c._149_BC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(AD_70)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kiev_(1240)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Baghdad_(1258)

Just a few well-known examples, history is full of them.

Jerusalem surrendered because a couple of Romans in mufti with hidden weapons smuggled themselves into the Temple and slaughtered a priest before the guards cut then down? Really? Try again.

 

[McHrozni]

Jerusalem surrendered because a couple of Romans in mufti with hidden weapons smuggled themselves into the Temple and slaughtered a priest before the guards cut then down? Really? Try again.

Oh that's what you were trying to say.

No, obviously not. This is the strategy of ISIS (and similar groups) where it's strong. See the rest of my post for the explanation of their rationale.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Now, tell me why, unless it is to enhance public hostility and support for further military action in the Middle East, and to encourage persecution and repression of Muslims in the West.

That's exactly the goal of ISIS. You quoted a post saying that before you answered this post, but deleted the crucial part you now claim ignorance of.

Not bad for a single post!

McHrozni

 

[cullennz]

Yes, it seems entirely plausible to me. The underlying principle of this type of terrorist campaign is to associate a brutal civilian cost with a target's traditional military operations. At first, of course, it will strengthen resolve. But the goal is, with time and persistence, civilian populations will turn against their leadership for "provoking" these horrifying terrorist attacks with their "meddling", and demand an end to it.

This isn't like normal warfare.

The just want to attack.

There is no if we kill heaps of people they will stop bombing US.

 

[McHrozni]

This isn't like normal warfare.

The just want to attack.

Close - they want to die while killing infidels. As far as I know that's the only sure way a Muslim can reach paradise.

McHrozni

 

[cullennz]

Close - they want to die while killing infidels. As far as I know that's the only sure way a Muslim can reach paradise.

McHrozni

Nope

Attack. But lone wolves usually die

 

[Craig B]

This isn't like normal warfare.

The just want to attack.

There is no if we kill heaps of people they will stop bombing US.

So we've given up attributing any strategy to the Islamist extremists. The purpose of slaughtering a priest in his own church during a service, at the inevitable cost of the lives of the two perpetrators, was simply to kill a single "infidel". You believe that?

 

[McHrozni]

Nope

Attack. But lone wolves usually die

If you strap a bomb to yourself to blow yourself up and kill people around you, chances are quite strongly arrayed against your survival. If logic isn't enough there are also plenty of examples of such attacks in history that show successful suicide bombers always die. Hardly surprising, really - individual terrorists want to die a 'martyr's' death, ISIS wants a war of civilizations they are convinced they will win.

McHrozni

 

[cullennz]

If you strap a bomb to yourself to blow yourself up and kill people around you, chances are quite strongly arrayed against your survival. If logic isn't enough there are also plenty of examples of such attacks in history that show successful suicide bombers always die. Hardly surprising, really - individual terrorists want to die a 'martyr's' death, ISIS wants a war of civilizations they are convinced they will win.

McHrozni

There are plenty of ISIS just fighting.

 

[McHrozni]

There are plenty of ISIS just fighting.

Individuals who conduct the attacks like the one in the OP want to be martyrs. That doesn't mean that's the sole goal of each member of ISIS.

McHrozni

 

[cullennz]

Individuals who conduct the attacks like the one in the OP want to be martyrs. That doesn't mean that's the sole goal of each member of ISIS.

McHrozni

They was my point. You seemed to imply they did.

It's a bit like saying the Japanese were all suicidal in WW2 based on kamikaze pilots

 

[McHrozni]

They was my point. You seemed to imply they did.

I'm sure all members of ISIS wish to reach paradise eventually, some just consider it more convenient to wait until a later date. The Japanese sacrificed themselves for altruistic reasons, to benefit their country and Emperor, whereas Muslim terrorists do it for selfish reasons for the most part. I wouldn't compare the two.

McHrozni

 

[GlennB]

[qimg]http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f16/aishap/gfhduttxaueh0crpgmnwna_zpsb9vietj5.gif[/qimg]

Meaningless. You'd then need to analyse the sometimes/depends group to see how many of those might be willing to act on their beliefs.

 

[Aepervius]

The vast majority of Muslims in France were born in France. They originate outside of France,

They are from birth to death in different cultures.

The german of turk origin with their family and friends and neighbors are vastly different in culture than the french of algerian origin with friends and neighbors. As people tend to aggregate and congregate within their culture, there will be an influence from the culture of origin and the local culture.

That is why that "EU muslim" is utterly misleading.

 

[trustbutverify]

This isn't like normal warfare.

That's the point. Obviously.

The just want to attack.

No, the don't "just want to attack". ISIS (whose leadership happens to contain many former Baathists with military training) have goals, and tactics to address those goals.

There is no if we kill heaps of people they will stop bombing US.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[cullennz]

That's the point. Obviously.


No, the don't "just want to attack". ISIS (whose leadership happens to contain many former Baathists with military training) have goals, and tactics to address those goals.


You have no idea what you're talking about.

You disagree. I get it. The bitchy last sentence amuses me