to feel my sympathy with the French government evaporate?

[Tiivola]

So the French government wants to suspend civil liberties for three months, effectively turning the country into a police state?

And if Francois "this is war" Hollande invokes article 5 of the Nato treaty, the UK could be forced to join in military action in Syria?!

AIBU to think that while I have the greatest possible sympathy with the French people, the French government can go fuck themselves...?

juneau

Some of us don't have to imagine.
We can remember what has gone before.

Surely, at this point, it's become obvious that people will die?

ISIS will continue to carry out terrorist attacks for as long as they exist, so innocent people who are just going about their daily lives will die. If we retaliate, innocent people who are just going about their lives in countries that ISIS has a stronghold in, like Syria, will die.

We can only hope that ISIS go with them, because there is no peaceful resolution to this, and inaction has done nothing.

It's fine to say that you want peace. A pacifist cherishes peace no more or less than those who fight to protect it. It's all very well condemning the world wars, but we're all enjoying the fruits of those wars.

Everyone wants peace. It may well be the case that we have to fight to protect it, to keep our freedom and our species and our societies.

Al Queda was different because it was effectively a multi-celled organisation with no territory of its own. Isil's whole credibility is based on possessing territory, because without territory you can't have a caliphate. Not to mention all the slaves etc they are rewarding their young fighters with. The territory they have is also linked to a prophecy about Armageddon, and has symbolic significance. Losing that would be a humiliating defeat, and would call into question the whole validity of the caliphate in the eyes of their supporters. At least, that's what's being claimed by some experts.

I fear this is what happens when politicians who aren't conviction-led individuals, but instead people who are good at playing the election-winning game and spin doctoring, get into power (often without an outright majority, in many western countries). They lack the single most important value an elected official should have: the ability to exercise his or her own judgement in a way that reflects what the people want.

It was the same with Bush and Blair, not the same with Obama (hence why he is roundly pilloried for "doing nothing").

Weak men (so far it has been men) who struggle with difficult decisions use brute force. I'm speaking of both sides here: attackers and victims. It's a fool's game and the people get stuck in the middle, again on both sides.

Suspension of the rule of law is extremely grave. It's lawlessness on the part of the officials. It is precisely in difficult times that civil liberties need to be protected, not suspended. By all means put in place extra temporary powers with heightened scrutiny. But not this. Absolute power breeds absolute corruption.

We are at war. Isis is a state that has declared war on us and our allies. We've been pretending we're not, because that would force our mercantile government to pause their patrons acquisition of profit and do things that would piss off voters but save lives.

But France has obviously reached the point where it can no longer lie to itself and soon our comforting delusion will be similarly dispersed.

So Anchor you're saying you choose for the innocent people dying, to be the ones far away from you in somewhere like Syria?
That's the thing though - I'm not being an "appeaser" (when did that term suddenly become fashionable) I just don't get who the fuck we/the French are meant to go to war with.
Yes they can continue to bomb Isis strongholds but that's about it.
And even that makes me squeamish because it's back to that whole thing of, our civilians are precious, but fuck your civilians who are valueless collateral damage.
But no I honestly don't have an answer.
I'm not thrilled at cheerfully surrendering our civil liberties either but yes I would find fighting Isis on the basis of intelligence more palatable than the bombings. It makes more sense, anyway, given that most of the attacks on European soil have been carried out by Europeans.

Don't be silly Twinkle

The snoopers charter will only show you what the honest people are doing.
Those who wish to commit these kinds of atrocities will find ways of communicating that go undetected.

We are at war. What the hell is France supposed to do, or us that matter.? Try and reason with that bunch of blood thirsty religious nut jobs? It's never going to happen. They want the distruction of the west and our very civilisation . They won't stop, and by us not getting involved doesn't make us safer.

I'm not silly at all justanotherlurker.

Security services have to jump through hoops to justify their interest in certain people and will of course be able to keep up with how they communicate. It's not just emails and phone calls I'm aware of that.

My sympathy was never with the French government.
It was with the victims families and friends who have suffered a terrible loss

As for bombing Syria, the west never gave a shit about this part of the world until Oil was found apart from wanting to colonise it in the olden days. I doubt they give much of a toss about a few civilians being killed like they didn't in Iraq.

It just like Africa now. No one cares about that either. 150 plus kids killed at a University in Kenya. It receives a tenth or less of the coverage of Paris and yet it is no less horrible. Yes they throw a bit of money over there now and again but as for the rest of it, they don't seem overly bothered.

The only way to defeat ISIS is support the Russians and Assad.

Slaggy No, not at all. I'd rather evacuate Syria so that nobody innocent dies. I don't know what the answer is, but I can't see a way in which that can happen, and neither can the global decision makers.

I don't think Syrians, or any other people, are more valuable than UK citizens, or me. Not at all. We are all only lucky that ISIS hasn't taken over the UK, because we'd either be dead, or we'd be those citizens that were being bombed to get rid of ISIS.

Any ideology that surrounds nobody dying, though, is flawed. It won't happen, because there is no way that it can. Even if the West surrendered, we'd all be slaughtered. ISIS want to kill us all, that is their aim. They'd kill all the Syrians too.

I am sure that if you ask Hollande professionally, he would have to say that the French people are the most important, because he represents them. Maybe he even believes that. Maybe he struggles with bombing innocents just as much as we would, and feels immense guilt at having to order that.

I can't see a viable alternative than trying to wipe out ISIS, and that will have "collateral damage", as you put it. That's not something I've created, it's not something I can solve, it's not something that I agree with. There is no alternative, though.

It has become they die or we do, and it's foolhardy to assume that there's a method to beat ISIS that doesn't involve innocents.

We are in France. I am happy to be searched, or questioned or do whatever it takes to make my family safe.
We cannot keep doing nothing - thay clearly hasnt worked so far.
I understand posters are saying 'why are our civilians more important thantheirs' - but when our civilians include my babies, I know who is important to me.

I think a strong reaction is not a bad thing. Being feeble is worse. these people need to be stopped and not appeased. I'm not sure I agree with the bombing of Syria as it's a civil war and people there are actually fleeing those terrorists. The Russian complication doesn't help.

And let's face it, while morally there should be equal sympathy for everyone who is dying or fighting terrorism -

If there is an attack in Africa, and an attack in the house next door to you, which one is going to be your immediate concern? Which one will scare you more?

The one next door. Because whilst you might absolutely sympathise with Africa, and you might be desperate to help, it's too far away for you to help - and if the people in the house next door fall, and their attackers come for you, there won't be enough time to help Africa anyway.

That's not saying that a European life is more valuable than an African life at all. It's saying that you save yourself first, if you are at threat. We all do. You put your own oxygen mask on first, then the person next to you, not the person at the back of the plane.

I feel like this whole ordeal is one not so tiny hope skip and a jump to everyone thinking us Muslims are the same.
When I watched the news the other day and all that horrible stuff was happening in Paris I felt an immediate feeling of saddnes for all those that died. Then i let out a big sigh because being a normal non extreme muslim is gonna get so much harder.

Security services have to jump through hoops to justify their interest in certain people and will of course be able to keep up with how they communicate.

Er, no they won't. Encryption is pretty much unbreakable these days, and several email companies (Google for one) already automatically encrypt emails.

Any sort of security put in place will cause hassle to "ordinary" people, while those they are trying to catch simply evade it.

What kind of intelligence do you need slaggy?

Where their terror training camps are? Yep, we knew that and France has bombed them.
That they were planning to attack us? Er, well a bit late for that - they already did.
That they have the capability to bring down planes full of holiday makers? Oh, they did that already too - two weeks ago.
That they hate the west and will do anything to kill westerners, including bombing them and beheading them if they stray into daesh territory? Oh, you know they've done that already too.
That they will kill, enslave and rape anyone (inc. children), who doesn't follow their particular brand of Islam? You know what? They already did that too.

So tell us, what more do you need to know to make you feel okay about using our military force against them?

Lots of really good posts here.
A few from a minority who are clearly not really fully understanding the new world order we are having to live with. I wonder what they would do if they were the one having to make difficult decisions.

And for Daesh.. . . go fuck yourselves

Millipede, I'm no expert either, maybe someone else can enlighten us. I just wasn't sure whether in practice one country can declare war against an organisation rather than another country. Just thinking back to what has happened in the past, there has been a formal ultimatum through diplomatic channels followed by a formal declaration of war, and at the end of the war there has normally been some sort of treaty between governments. None of that would be possible with a terrorist organisation. Also in practical terms I don't see how you can realistically declare war against an organisation rather than a country, because it is virtually impossible to mount any sort of attack on them without invading the territory of the country where they are based and/or without dropping bombs on that country and, almost inevitably, its citizens.

Well, I'm from Africa and live in the Middle East, so.... not sure how to answer that one!
I'm just horribly uncomfortable with the decision being made that some collateral damage is okay, as long as it's not Western collateral damage.
And even if you blow up the impoverished goat herders or whoever the fuck the Isis troops in Iraq or Syria consist of, you've done nothing to eradicate the Brits/French/Belgian nutters who are likely to be the ones carrying out attacks on EU soil.

Supermanspants what do you mean a few who domt understand the new world order that we live in?

Never give up your civil liberties in the face of terrorism. Our civil liberties were hard won, we should never give them up through fear of extremists.

I've not heard one survivor of the Paris attacks call for these measures, I've only heard them talking of liberté fraternité égalité.

One survivor put it beautifully:

"We are in a free country, I love democracy, I believe in human rights, I believe in freedom, I want equality between women and men, I don't know why people think different."

juneau just a shame that they are in territories full of terrified civilians, including the enslaved women and children you are so concerned about that you would rain bombs upon.

Considering that Germany failed to arrest neonazis despite reading our e-mails and all that, I don't think that helps much ... though maybe they are just lazy because the neonazis are German, and would be a bit more observant with terrorists from other countries?

My sympathy with the French government didn't evaporate as I don't have much sympathy with governments in the first place.