Paris attack... some reality.

P

PaulS

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
14,144
Location
New England
Display Name
Display name:
PaulS
I lifted this from a facebook post by Isobel Bowdery. Chilling stuff.

you never think it will happen to you. It was just a friday night at a rock show. the atmosphere was so happy and everyone was dancing and smiling. and then when the men came through the front entrance and began the shooting, we naiively believed it was all part of the show. It wasn't just a terrorist attack, it was a massacre.

Dozens of people were shot right infront of me. Pools of blood filled the floor. Cries of grown men who held their girlfriends dead bodies pierced the small music venue. Futures demolished, families heartbroken. in an instant. Shocked and alone, I pretended to be dead for over an hour, lying among people who could see their loved ones motionless..

Holding my breath, trying to not move, not cry - not giving those men the fear they longed to see. I was incredibly lucky to survive. But so many didn't. The people who had been there for the exact same reasons as I - to have a fun friday night were innocent. This world is cruel. And acts like this are suppose to highlight the depravity of humans and the images of those men circuling us like vultures will haunt me for the rest of my life.

The way they meticoulsy aimed at shot people around the standing area i was in the centre of without any consideration for human life. It didn't feel real. i expected any moment for someone to say it was just a nightmare. But being a survivor of this horror lets me able to shed light on the heroes.

To the man who reassured me and put his life on line to try and cover my brain whilst i whimpered, to the couple whose last words of love kept me believing the good in the world, to the police who succeded in rescuing hundreds of people, to the complete strangers who picked me up from the road and consoled me during the 45 minutes I truly believed the boy i loved was dead, to the injured man who i had mistaken for him and then on my recognition that he was not Amaury, held me and told me everything was going to be fine despite being all alone and scared himself, to the woman who opened her doors to the survivors, to the friend who offered me shelter and went out to buy new clothes so i wouldnt have to wear this blood stained top, to all of you who have sent caring messages of support - you make me believe this world has the potential to be better. to never let this happen again.

but most of this is to the 80 people who were murdered inside that venue, who weren't as lucky, who didnt get to wake up today and to all the pain that their friends and families are going through. I am so sorry. There's nothing that will fix the pain. I feel priviledged to be there for their last breaths. And truly beliving that I would join them, I promise that their last thoughts were not on the animals who caused all this. It was thinking of the people they loved.

As i lay down in the blood of strangers and waiting for my bullet to end my mere 22 years, I envisioned every face that I have ever loved and whispered I love you. over and over again. reflecting on the highlights of my life. Wishing that those i love knew just how much, wishing that they knew that no matter what happened to me, to keep belieivng in the good in people. to not let those men win.

Last night, the lives of many were forever changed and it is up to us to be better people. to live lives that the innocent victims of this tragedy dreamt about but sadly will now never be able to fulfil. RIP angels. You will never be forgotten.
 
Last edited:
I guess Isobel's keyboard didn't have a carriage return key.
 
I'm going to have to cut some slack to anyone over spelling, grammar, syntax etc if they are posting soon after surviving a massacre. Probably posting on a handheld device and not with a keyboard in the comfort of home, too.
 
Yup, the grammar police can go to hell for now.

The one thing that struck me - again - is the absolute and utter helplessness of the People of Paris. As they were during Charlie Hebdo.
Their so called leaders have decreed that they are sheep which can be slaughtered at will.
The terrorist butches can stand there at their leisure a pick one target after another - oh that one moved, and is that tears I see, and your cell phone just rang so you are dog meat.
The butchers have no fear because the sheep cannot defend themselves.
Thousands of people were cowering, running, begging for their lives in front of the butchers and not a single person could defend his loved ones.

When seconds are the difference between living and dying the police are twenty minutes away while they put on their tactical gear and star the trucks and unlock the gun room.

I went to the astronomical society meeting that evening while the TV was still showing live views of the gunfire and raising the death count every few minutes as the hospital reports came in.. This meeting was at a planetarium where guns are absolutely, flatly, don't-you-dare, forbidden.
I took my chances that a jury would not let me down - while the pallbearers surely would.
 
Reads like a solid win for the murderous muslim invaders.
 
Phoenix said:
Reads like a solid win for the murderous muslim invaders.
Click to expand...

There would be more honor in that.

...sadly they wernt "invaders", France welcomed them in with arms wide open.
 
Tom-D said:
The sad thing is, to stop this we must be as bad as them.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

We will have to do some terrible things, but self-defense is self-defense.

It would be easier to kill without honor, without concern for innocent bystanders (not to mention deliberately targeting the innocent), etc, but that shouldn't be what we do.
 
Tom-D said:
The sad thing is, to stop this we must be as bad as them.
Click to expand...

I think it was Winston Churchill that said, "Men must become animals to win this war."

And so it will have to be to beat back the extremist muslims.
 
Tom-D said:
The sad thing is, to stop this we must be as bad as them.
Click to expand...

pmanton said:
WORSE !!!
Click to expand...

I don't believe that. I think we just have to stop with our suicidal policies, and simply untie our hands. I don't see us needing to break into non-military installations, shoot random civilians, including women and children.
 
PPC1052 said:
I don't believe that. I think we just have to stop with our suicidal policies, and simply untie our hands. I don't see us needing to break into non-military installations, shoot random civilians, including women and children.
Click to expand...

The US military was fully prepared to do just that in Japan. And that was what it would have taken if not for the atomic bombs.
 
Bob Noel said:
I disagree.

We will have to do some terrible things, but self-defense is self-defense.

It would be easier to kill without honor, without concern for innocent bystanders (not to mention deliberately targeting the innocent), etc, but that shouldn't be what we do.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what the extremist muslim is doing now?
 
Zeldman said:
The US military was fully prepared to do just that in Japan. And that was what it would have taken if not for the atomic bombs.
Click to expand...

I confess to being ignorant of such plans. A whole scale invasion, yes. Fully prepared for citizens to throw themselves at U.S. forces, and for the U.S. forces to be prepared to repel such assaults, sure. But I am not aware of any night clubs or soccer stadiums being on the target list, with a tactical plan to storm them randomly shoot civilians for no reason what-so-ever, executing the dying as they lay in pools of blood. I must say I missed that one.
 
PPC1052 said:
I don't believe that. I think we just have to stop with our suicidal policies, and simply untie our hands. I don't see us needing to break into non-military installations, shoot random civilians, including women and children.
Click to expand...

You have evidence our military routinely pops into civilian places and starts shooting women and children? Please provide some evidence.
 
LDJones said:
You have evidence our military routinely pops into civilian places and starts shooting women and children? Please provide some evidence.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were responding to someone else, or maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. Sorry. I do not think that U.S. pops into civilian places (routinely or otherwise) and starts shooting. In fact, I was trying to communicate exactly the opposite. My point is that we can, and generally do, achieve military success without being the evil war criminals that these folks are. My biggest concern is that we are too concerned with political correctness for our own good. My apologies if I was less than clear.
 
Last edited:
What a powerful OP. The unspeakable terror that must have been in the air is too much for any of us to think about.

I'd offer this beyond what has been said, the solution to these types of acts is to stop looking for the answer in the big picture and look for the answer in the details. The big picture with these extremist groups muddies the water. An attack like this by a country would, in the eyes of every nation in the world, justify an intense response back. I'm sick of listening to so called experts talk of "destabilizing" forces in the Middle East, all the while forgetting that the single biggest destabilizing force in the world is these terrorist groups. The world must unite behind the countries fighting against the horror being perpetrated by groups being harbored in middle eastern countries. I applaud the French for striking back against these groups shortly after the attacks and sending a clear message that they will not stand for an attack against them. The United Stares and every civilized country should follow suit in the coming days and eradicate the groups currently existing. It's time for the right in the world to lead from in front and not from behind.

But I doubt any of this meant anything to the people like the one that wrote and inspired the original post- I doubt they were concerned how the world would react to the slaughter. I'm fairly certain they just wished to stay alive.
 
LDJones said:
You have evidence our military routinely pops into civilian places and starts shooting women and children? Please provide some evidence.
Click to expand...

Well yes we do, although semantically not exactly. We do drone->missile civilian houses to kill one person, when other people are home.
 
Phoenix said:
Well yes we do, although semantically not exactly. We do drone->missile civilian houses to kill one person, when other people are home.
Click to expand...

But that one person is a very bad person and likely attempting to take advantage of hiding among civilians for cover.

That's not at all the same as attempting to bomb a sports stadium, walking into several cafe's opening fire in a mall and murdering people in a concert hall.

Pacifism has no end among many and miss equating scenarios is often at the root among those wanting to do nothing.
 
jspilot said:
But that one person is a very bad person and likely attempting to take advantage of hiding among civilians for cover.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same. If one is a suspected terrorist on the drone missile list and then goes in a house they are hiding among civilians for cover? Or just eating dinner? Your argument presumes these people know they are going to get missiled and, thus to be fair to our fragile conscience, must live out their lives in open space. We kill the snot out of civilians, probably why we want to let so many in to try and alleviate guilt.
 
Phoenix said:
Well yes we do, although semantically not exactly. We do drone->missile civilian houses to kill one person, when other people are home.
Click to expand...

Precisely why so many people around the world hate us.

The outrage that would occur, and rightly so, if another country began drone strikes in the U.S. to kill terrorists, any civilians in the area are just acceptable collateral damage.

And yet we don't think they have a right to be outraged when we do it?
 
Last edited:
Gerhardt said:
Precisely why so many people around the world hate us.

The outrage that would occur, and rightly so, if another country began drone strikes in the U.S. to kill terrorists, any civilians in the area are just acceptable collateral damage.

And yet we don't think they have a right to be outraged when we do it?
Click to expand...

Most people in the world hate us because we are a moral and economic drain on their society. It's actually funny, they don't hate Americans, I get treated well around the globe, they hate our leadership, the one we revolted against in 1776 but lost because there was no plan for success.
 
Phoenix said:
Exactly the same. If one is a suspected terrorist on the drone missile list and then goes in a house they are hiding among civilians for cover? Or just eating dinner? Your argument presumes these people know they are going to get missiled and, thus to be fair to our fragile conscience, must live out their lives in open space. We kill the snot out of civilians, probably why we want to let so many in to try and alleviate guilt.
Click to expand...

This is hard for me to follow because I'm unaware that any of the over 150 people killed in Paris were actually terrorists( beside the ones who were terrorists who blew themselves up.)

See my point is, Terrorists kill innocent civilians who did nothing wrong and we are supposed to sit idly by and allow them to continue because, it's difficult to limit casualties in a counter attack. What the terrorists did in Paris was attack.( an act of war mind you if done by a country) If the US military or any other country's military wants to defend itself it should do so without concern for how that action will be viewed by the rest of the world. What the terrorists did is not at all the same as the US military going in and bombing a known terrorist location filled with horrible people who did a great deal wrong. You can't possibly equate the action of taking out a known terrorist safe haven with walking into a concert hall and murdering people for the sake of, well who knows what?!?!?!

Countries have every right to defend themselves and, if proactive measures like destroying terrorist safe heavens was something done more often, we would live in a united world against these groups. Instead, we decide to tip toe around these issues hoping that terrorists will just go away. I think we see where that gets us.
 
So terrorists are only ever in the presence of other terrorists? If I'm on the drone kill list and they choose Gaston's to missile me, everyone else that dies deserved it? We kill people going about their lives that just happen to be sitting next to someone who, according to policy, deserves to die.
jspilot said:
This is hard for me to follow because I'm unaware that any of the over 150 people killed in Paris were actually terrorists( beside the ones who were terrorists who blew themselves up.)

See my point is, Terrorists kill innocent civilians who did nothing wrong and we are supposed to sit idly by and allow them to continue because, it's difficult to limit casualties in a counter attack. What the terrorists did in Paris was attack.( an act of war mind you if done by a country) If the US military or any other country's military wants to defend itself it should do so without concern for how that action will be viewed by the rest of the world. What the terrorists did is not at all the same as the US military going in and bombing a known terrorist location filled with horrible people who did a great deal wrong. You can't possibly equate the action of taking out a known terrorist safe haven with walking into a concert hall and murdering people for the sake of, well who knows what?!?!?!

Countries have every right to defend themselves and, if proactive measures like destroying terrorist safe heavens was something done more often, we would live in a united world against these groups. Instead, we decide to tip toe around these issues hoping that terrorists will just go away. I think we see where that gets us.
Click to expand...
 
Phoenix said:
So terrorists are only ever in the presence of other terrorists? If I'm on the drone kill list and they choose Gaston's to missile me, everyone else that dies deserved it? We kill people going about their lives that just happen to be sitting next to someone who, according to policy, deserves to die.
Click to expand...

Again the difference being that NONE of the people in Paris deserved to die. The one terrorist who is killed in the drone attack did( using your scenario). I'm still not sure how this fact escapes so many in this scenario.

Taking your analogy further- answer me this if you would, If the people who murdered all those concert goers had some how miraculously escaped, went to live with a family in Syria and the French had a chance to attack and take out that one person, should they be allowed to do that?

I'm certain they would attempt to limit casualties but I would hope they would not say, " wait we may kill the family too so we will allow this awful creature to stay alive because that risk is there." Please, that is the type of policy that gets us in a world where the strong dominate force because the weak and feeble force. The current government in this country sides with you and we see escalating violence throughout the world and a global threat.
 
Deserve to die is a separate question, good to see we are in agreement that we do routinely kill women and children. We just tell ourselves it is worth it to get the bad guy. Maybe it is, point being we knowingly and intentionally kill women and children as part of our policy.
jspilot said:
Again the difference being that NONE of the people in Paris deserved to die. The one terrorist who is killed in the drone attack did( using your scenario). I'm still not sure how this fact escapes so many in this scenario.

Taking your analogy further- answer me this if you would, If the people who murdered all those concert goers had some how miraculously escaped, went to live with a family in Syria and the French had a chance to attack and take out that one person, should they be allowed to do that?

I'm certain they would attempt to limit casualties but I would hope they would not say, " wait we may kill the family too so we will allow this awful creature to stay alive because that risk is there." Please, that is the type of policy that gets us in a world where the strong dominate force because the weak and feeble force. The current government in this country sides with you and we see escalating violence throughout the world and a global threat.
Click to expand...
 
Deserve to die is irrelevant as a concept, we all deserve to die the moment we are born. Unless we are sentenced to execution, we have no knowledge of how or when that will come, only that it will come without compunction or compassion for age or social status. To try to micro manage your safety is an exercise in futility.
 
jspilot said:
But that one person is a very bad person and likely attempting to take advantage of hiding among civilians for cover.

That's not at all the same as attempting to bomb a sports stadium, walking into several cafe's opening fire in a mall and murdering people in a concert hall.

Pacifism has no end among many and miss equating scenarios is often at the root among those wanting to do nothing.
Click to expand...

Have you ever wondered how it is that guys can walk into a room full of strangers and start taking them down like a shooting gallery? How can they not feel for the people they are killing? In this case, the motivating force that gets them to the location and initiate trigger pull is revenge. Pure and simple revenge.

We sit in our comfy living room chairs and our military sends out some sort of aircraft that is in no real danger to unload bombs on whoever down below. Civilians die by the score. Now our enemies don't have this fancy remote control push button technology, so they improvise the best they can. These 7-8 attackers are their low budget remote control push button death machine. They want us to know what it's like to be indiscriminately killed.

It has been said time and time again by experts that study this struggle with terrorism, that nothing fills the recruiting rolls faster for the terrorists than our aerial bombardment campaigns. They are universally despised in the Middle East not only for their indiscriminate killing, but also their cowardice.

So if we want this struggle to go on and on forever and to have an endless stream of suicide attacks in our cities and our public transport, by all means we should bomb the hell out of them from the air.

Aerial bombardment by itself never has and never will defeat an enemy force. It's a huge waste of money and only adds high octane fuel to the fire.
 
PPC1052 said:
I confess to being ignorant of such plans. A whole scale invasion, yes. Fully prepared for citizens to throw themselves at U.S. forces, and for the U.S. forces to be prepared to repel such assaults, sure. But I am not aware of any night clubs or soccer stadiums being on the target list, with a tactical plan to storm them randomly shoot civilians for no reason what-so-ever, executing the dying as they lay in pools of blood. I must say I missed that one.
Click to expand...

Yes you did miss a lot. The incendiary raids on Japan, which took place before the atomic bombs killed thousands, many more than the two atomic weapons. This was indiscriminate bombing which set thousands of civilian homes on fire, which in turn killed thousands of civilians, women and children, etc. . Tokyo was one target that accomplished this. Lemay was in charge and ordered that the B 29s carry only incendiary bombs. Then there was Hamburg and Dresden in Germany where the bombing killed , again, many thousands of civilians. We lost around 450 thousand in WW2. Germany lost that many during the last few weeks of the war. " shock and awe" killed thousands of civilians in Iraq as well .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top