http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/03/23/is-trains-400-fighters-to-attack-europe-in-wave-bloodshed.html

 

When I was about to leave work last night, I was browsing several news sites and stumbled across this disheartening information. Allegedly the number is between 400-600 specially trained operatives who are prepared to launch attacks. Europol stated the number is highly credible and agree with that number gathered through intelligence reports. While ISIS may only have several hundred trained and specialized operatives, I believe those involved with an ISIS affiliation to well exceed that. In addition to gunmen and bombers, they also need people involved in logistics/smuggling, recruitment, and operations planners. Not to mention the countless sympathizers who refuse to betray those who 'share the same faith'.

 

I hope law enforcement agencies quickly arrest those suspected of terrorist activities, or those who offer safe haven to terrorists. Stay safe and vigilant my European friends. My heart and prayers go out to those being affected by this.

You got to take the gloves off on these guys. They cannot be allowed to operate. One thing that's not in news is 400-600 may be the core trained fighters, but they likely would have support networks. That's a bad news but also the weak link. 

I've been saying it for the past 6 months that ISIS was flooding us with operatives, but back then the official party line was "there is not a shred of evidence that there are terrorists among the migrants".

 

Now that the humanitarian dickheads finally got bored and are are pulling out, we're left with a bunch of useless and hostile vagrants, undercover terrorists and a security risk with the size of Mount Everest. Bravo, and a big FU to the Western EU leaders.

...

 

And this is different from organized crime in which sense? Less people but more death I guess?

 

One uses the means presently in place to the best of there utilities and evolves when necesairly. The moment you go head first with no plan but "lets get them" you have lost yourself already.

 

Also, worth a read: link

To be honest, I don't care about theoretical debates at this point, I care about results. There are no results and my patience is wearing thin. I'm also not the only one.

 

And no offense, but that article is typical regressive leftist horseradish

Edited March 24, 201610 yr by ccabal86

Oh,God!!!  Europe is totally screwed! And I'm terrified now (I'm serious) because migrants have come in Thessaloniki's port (MY CITY!!!) as well! Not to mention numerous of other European cities...These are the problems that policies like ''Come and go as you like'' cause!!!  Well done EU! Thanks for that!

To be honest, I don't care about theoretical debates at this point, I care about results. There are no results and my patience is wearing thin. I'm also not the only one.

 

And no offense, but that article is typical regressive leftist horseradish

Sure we shouldn't do theoretical debates, hence we should just do what we are currently already doing and adjust when justified. Throwing a tantrum and demanding harsher treatment "cause ..." won't get us anywhere except on the same path as the guys you are currently hating. (which are theoretical debates aswell >_>)

 

You do know who typed that article right?

Do what we are currently doing? Oh you mean nothing? Or perhaps you mean the mind-numbingly retarded deal with Turkey? Which is bound to fail, yet there is no plan B? Or the other stupid plan where FRONTEX could send border patrols to guard the borders of countries that explicitly protest their involvement?

 

Also, Stockholm Syndrome is a medical condition, thankfully treatments can help alleviate some of the symptoms.

Currently we are already doing alot of things, otherwise we would be seeing mass graves thruwout europe and the borders. And do you acknowledge that most of the issues keeping us from streamlining all this refugee stuff is actual single nations being as dickish as you would like the whole EU to be? You want to keep saying that the best solution is to look the other way and ignore, doubt that will help much.

 

Seperate the refugee from the migrant, I am all for. Throw all out cause they might be hiding 1 militant with a bloodvengenance, grats, you just catered there whole ideology to dozens more who will go and come back.

 

In what way is that journalist whitewashing and apolegetic to ISIS? Cause he makes it seem less like a holy war you and ISIS think it is (or want it to be)? Geez.

The EU's main responsibility should be to its own citizens, not the illegal migrants. Right now, it's the other way around, western EU states don't give a crap about whether their own citizens want to take these people, pay for their accomodation/food/shooling. They don't even care that infiltrating terrorists are killing innocents.

 

We also need to cut the crap and establish that these vagrants are NOT refugees. They stop being refugees the minute they leave Syria. Or do you mean to sell me that they are in immediate mortal danger in Turkey? In Greece? Macedonia? Serbia?

 

And since we established that they are NOT refugees, why should we care in the SLIGHTEST that they are stupid enough to get into a rickety boat or an airless minivan? They read the news, know the risks.These people aren't forced into these situations against their will, they're PAYING the smugglers to get them into Europe instead of properly applying for a refugee status. Everyone must bear the consequences of their own actions, and these people are no different.

 

The journalist is playing the usual "but terrorists are people too" angle, which is unfortunately widely shared by the European political mainstream. As I see it, if you wage war against humanity itself, you should do that whith the understanding that you also forfeit your rights to be treated as other human beings. Terrorists should be made an example of to serve as a warning to other who might consider walking the same path.

Edited March 24, 201610 yr by ccabal86

Not one single refugee arriving in Europe has taken part in a terrorist attack. Not one. 

 

All those taking part have been EU Citizens. 

 

So by all means throw all the refugees into the sea and watch them die. 

 

Won't solve a damn thing, can potentially kill tens of thousands and sow seeds of hatred that will last generations, but sure, it will make a few right wing tabloid rags feel better for a day or two. 

Not one single refugee arriving in Europe has taken part in a terrorist attack. Not one. 

 

All those taking part have been EU Citizens. 

 

So by all means throw all the refugees into the sea and watch them die. 

 

Won't solve a damn thing, can potentially kill tens of thousands and sow seeds of hatred that will last generations, but sure, it will make a few right wing tabloid rags feel better for a day or two. 

 

• Another bomber carried a passport belonging to a 25-year-old Syrian named "Ahmad al-Mohammad".^[114][115]

  A passport-holder claiming to be a Syrian refugee with that name was

  registered on Leros in October upon his arrival from Turkey.^[117] The dead attacker's fingerprints matched those taken at the registration on Leros.^{[114][118][119][120][121]}

  French officials concluded that "Ahmad al-Mohammad" is probably a dead

  Syrian soldier whose passport was stolen after he was killed in Syria.^[122][123]

• The third bomber has not been named by French police yet, but his image released by the authorities has been matched by the BBC

  with a photo on arrival papers at Leros belonging to a man travelling

  together with "Ahmad al-Mohammed" under the name of "M. al-Mahmod".^[124]

 

 

^{there you go. this should make it clear that the "allow refugees in" policy was indeed used to smuggle fighters into europe. on top of this, who's to say that part of the refugees next generation won't be "radicalized"? (pff... radicalized... such a silly term)}

Human smuggling was not invented by ISIS or only developed in this time. If there were no refugees they would have come a different way. Still point stands that these are European citizens.

We also need to cut the crap and establish that these vagrants are NOT refugees. They stop being refugees the minute they leave Syria. Or do you mean to sell me that they are in immediate mortal danger in Turkey? In Greece? Macedonia? Serbia?

Have you seen the camps they have to live in? If you haven't, please do. If you have, you'll know they aren't safe there and will starve, burn or freeze to death in a matter of time... Then you'll also understand that they would risk their lives AGAIN to get away from there to another European country.

Smoke Screen. They may be European citizens on paper (by right of birth mostly), but they never considered themselves that. You're trying to paint it like like a middle-class anglican kid was just as likely to become a Jihadist like a low-income muslim teenager with an immigrant background.

 

Also, here's a comprehensive map of ISIS linked or ISIS inspired attacks in Europe, which captures the severity of the problem: http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/isiss-campaign-europe

Smoke Screen. They may be European citizens on paper (by right of birth mostly), but they never considered themselves that. You're trying to paint it like like a middle-class anglican kid was just as likely to become a Jihadist like a low-income muslim teenager with an immigrant background.

 

Also, here's a comprehensive map of ISIS linked or ISIS inspired attacks in Europe, which captures the severity of the problem: http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/isiss-campaign-europe

How do you get from "we have disenfranchised people" to mainstream white kid is as likely to become a terrorist?

 

And I fully agree that they don't see themselves as European. The question is what are we going to do about that? Somehow I don't think that executions and torture are a good way of uniting communities.

Human smuggling was not invented by ISIS or only developed in this time. If there were no refugees they would have come a different way. Still point stands that these are European citizens.

Smoke Screen. They may be European citizens on paper (by right of birth mostly), but they never considered themselves that. You're trying to paint it like like a middle-class anglican kid was just as likely to become a Jihadist like a low-income muslim teenager with an immigrant background.

 

 

Also, here's a comprehensive map of ISIS linked or ISIS inspired attacks in Europe, which captures the severity of the problem: http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/isiss-campaign-europe

 

 

 

We also need to cut the crap and establish that these vagrants are NOT refugees. They stop being refugees the minute they leave Syria. Or do you mean to sell me that they are in immediate mortal danger in Turkey? In Greece? Macedonia? Serbia?

Have you seen the camps they have to live in? If you haven't, please do. If you have, you'll know they aren't safe there and will starve, burn or freeze to death in a matter of time... Then you'll also understand that they would risk their lives AGAIN to get away from there to another European country.

 

The world is indeed a shit and unfair place, but Europe is not a charity organization, we don't have any sort of "obligation" to help these people out. Or do you also believe we obligated to feed/clothe/house better half of India, South-East Asia, most of of sub-Saharan Africa, etc? Because a good portion of the world's population is even worse off than those people in the camps.

Well, if this thread told me anything, it's that ccabal himself isn't the european most europeans think they are. If the EU was really all about bettering the lifes of the people INSIDE its borders and only inside, why is is expanding then? cause annexing is fun?

 

The EU is a working social organization, a somewhat present political organization and a idiotic economical organization. Part of the issues faced with refugess/immigrants are cause the political side of the EU is not really a union but more 27 ego's in 1 room all thinking about their own ass. In which way this is different from any other level (from global to town level) is beyond me. You gonna throw a hissy fit when someone moves into your street and starts painting their house bright pink?

Human smuggling was not invented by ISIS or only developed in this time. If there were no refugees they would have come a different way. Still point stands that these are European citizens.

but they were considered refugees until they decided to blow some people up. they only became terrorists afterwards.

Well, if this thread told me anything, it's that ccabal himself isn't the european most europeans think they are. If the EU was really all about bettering the lifes of the people INSIDE its borders and only inside, why is is expanding then? cause annexing is fun?

 

The EU is a working social organization, a somewhat present political organization and a idiotic economical organization. Part of the issues faced with refugess/immigrants are cause the political side of the EU is not really a union but more 27 ego's in 1 room all thinking about their own ass. In which way this is different from any other level (from global to town level) is beyond me. You gonna throw a hissy fit when someone moves into your street and starts painting their house bright pink?

I didn't know you were such an authority on deciding who's European and who isn't.

 

In actuality, despite the lofty slgans the EU was (and is) expanding due to economic reasons. Because establishing a common market with the free flow of goods, capital, persons and services is a damn good idea where everyone benefits in the end. Since the EU is still the largest economy in the world, a political union WOULD be beneficial, except most European leaders seem to be incapable of long-term strategic thinking and instead cling to old and rosy ideologies. They missed the memo about history not ending after the Annus Mirabilis and are now the laughingstock of the world from the US to Russia. By the way, I'm absolutely astonished that you think of the EU in terms of a social organization, when in fact a common social policy is pretty much non-existent.

 

And no, I will not throw a hissy fit if someone in my street paints their house pink. But I will not hide my opinion that it looks like shit when the topic comes up. And I will not, under any circumstances stand for the guy painting MY house pink.

Edited March 25, 201610 yr by ccabal86

 

Well, if this thread told me anything, it's that ccabal himself isn't the european most europeans think they are. If the EU was really all about bettering the lifes of the people INSIDE its borders and only inside, why is is expanding then? cause annexing is fun?

 

The EU is a working social organization, a somewhat present political organization and a idiotic economical organization. Part of the issues faced with refugess/immigrants are cause the political side of the EU is not really a union but more 27 ego's in 1 room all thinking about their own ass. In which way this is different from any other level (from global to town level) is beyond me. You gonna throw a hissy fit when someone moves into your street and starts painting their house bright pink?

I didn't know you were such an authority on deciding who's European and who isn't.

 

In actuality, despite the lofty slgans the EU was (and is) expanding due to economic reasons. Because establishing a common market with the free flow of goods, capital, persons and services is a damn good idea where everyone benefits in the end. Since the EU is still the largest economy in the world, a political union WOULD be beneficial, except most European leaders seem to be incapable of long-term strategic thinking and instead cling to old and rosy ideologies. They missed the memo about history not ending after the Annus Mirabilis and are now the laughingstock of the world from the US to Russia. By the way, I'm absolutely astonished that you think of the EU in terms of a social organization, when in fact a common social policy is pretty much non-existent.

 

And no, I will not throw a hissy fit if someone in my street paints their house pink. But I will not hide my opinion that it looks like shit when the topic comes up. And I will not, under any circumstances stand for the guy painting MY house pink.

 

I am not an authority on europeans, just the same way you aren't, hence my remark

 

Its a social project first and foremost, aided and supported by an economical one. You can't claim that trying to bridge different nationalities, cultures and just societies in general is anything but social in nature. The project started by pooling together some of the strongest nations together into a unified block for regulations in general (not just economical) and has gradually expanded to encompass almost all the europe.

 

Most if not all of the moaning comes down to 1 thing, the scale being used. People are moaning cause the scale goes beyond whcih they can fanthom or comprehend, the EU is just that massive. The moment a group of people becomes to large, divides can be found in term of common policy. This offcourse only aggrevates the larger the group. Maybe the EU is to big to be held together? I personally think it is still to soon for a strict fiscal union just cause 1 euro in Belgium isn't 1 euro in Bulgaria. But for a social reason, the social project I speak of, it is one made of issuing regulations to safeharbour all people and ways of life currently inhabiting the EU scale. I would really dislike the social project being backstabbed from petty squabbles about personal responcibility and cost. Nothing the EU does affects people on a personal level unless its something the person does something against the rather wide idea of society itself. Blame the EU's indesiciveness on that, but know that it actually is that way so that the least people are ticked off in the long run.

Lol, the EU is definitely NOT a social project, but it does explain your general standpoint on a number of things if you see it that way. Also, the EU is not that big, there are countries that are a lot bigger, they those aren't about to fall apart.

The EU social project was one made from the america marshall plan initiated after WW2, while the americans didn't envision it to happen, it came into being in the aftermath of that war. I would count the origin to be when the ECSC was made. Sure the thing was economical (the name implies it), but it was made by visionairs who found our national differences to be insignificant with the sheer notion of being human.

 

There may be countries that are bigger, but that is merely in pure numeral sense for both population or land. Only a handfull are as diverse, heck i think only India counts as being near the EU in term of diversity in term of social groups.

I'm familiar with the history, I just don't accept the social aspect was (or is) anything more than lofty slogans. They wanted economic recovery after WW2 and actually had half a brain to realize it would never be possible without the establishment of a tight economic cooperation

 

But even if we accept your position that the EU's top priorities are indeed of social nature, it still stands that its primary responsibility is to its citizens. Doing charity work in third countries or providing care fir third countries' citizens is up to NGOs, not states, or even a super state (which the EU is not)

Edited March 26, 201610 yr by ccabal86

sure we aren't in it to sing kumbaya all the time, but it started with a mindset of "lets try NOT to go into WW3".

 

and then the cold war happended >_>