By Patrick BAHZAD
We are at war now, says the French press ! No, we are not at war now ... We have been at war for some time already, not a conventional war, but a war nonetheless.
The trouble is, lots of people in the West in general, and in France in particular, didn't know or didn't want to know this uncomfortable truth, and a number of so called "analysts" and "experts" refused to acknowledge it, even after the January attacks on "Charlie Hebdo".
Earlier this year, I wrote a piece on SST "WRITING ON THE WALL: The significance of recent trends and patterns in Jihadi terrorism". Now, I realize I may sound like those "told you so" armchair strategists, but I want to warn again - like others - about the dangers our societies are exposed to. These threats are complex and just going after potential accomplices, or their backers, won't cut it.
This is now everybody's business. Most of us however have forgotten what it feels like to be targeted in our streets. Well, it is time to remember. France has never been at peace for more than 60 years and it definitely looks like that record is not going to be broken !
Earlier today, the French President said that we would "have no mercy for those responsible". I hope he means it ... The enemy, who will have heard these words, will relish the challenge. Showing no mercy is not a problem for them, they haven't shown any thus far. But are we ready for such a fight ?
Time to have a good look in the mirror and brace ourselves for things to come. This is only the beginning and we should not be afraid to confront that reality. There can be no turning back and no escaping this time !
Haralambos,
What controversy? The leaders of Europe decided to import the 3rd World based off a picture of a dead Syrian kid. Their f-cked in the head ideology makes them believe that you can "educate" a bunch of 70IQ feral savages into Europeans. More magical dirt theory.
There's no controversy here. Europe for Europeans. France for the French. Invaders to the sea, traitors to the firing line.
Posted by: Tyler | 14 November 2015 at 04:00 PM
UNSC passes a resolution that the GCC members cut the funding for terrorism or there will be an embargo of all oil sales from GCC countries and assets frozen. The world is awash in oil right now and is about to become more awash. If you are really worried about oil supply you can target one country at a time.
Posted by: J Villain | 14 November 2015 at 04:01 PM
bth
I have been trying (using the Socratic method)to bring you all to the point of devising a strategy against IS. IMO you should send me your campaign plan and I will publish it. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 14 November 2015 at 04:04 PM
I don't think the French governement is any better than Kerry, if you know what I mean...
Posted by: jld | 14 November 2015 at 04:22 PM
I just saw this at the Telegraph. What it says is no surprise but it's interesting that German civil servants explicitly stated they realized terrorists were successfully claiming to be Syrian refugees in Germany:
"While ministers argue, civil servants at the federal office for migration and refugees have published an open letter warning of serious flaws in procedures.
Asylum-seekers are being accepted as Syrians without being asked for any proof of their nationality, they warned.
Those claiming to be Syrian do not need to show passports, according to the letter. The only checking of their identity is carried out by freelance translators who often have little or no experience of Syrian dialects or accents, and are not accountable for any mistakes.
A “large proportion” of asylum-seekers were giving false identities in order to stay in Germany, the letter warned.
“The discontinuation of identity checks has also facilitated infiltration by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists into Europe,” it claimed."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/angela-merkel/11994337/Angela-Merkels-future-under-scrutiny-for-the-first-time-as-German-asylum-process-criticised.html
Posted by: jerseycityjoan | 14 November 2015 at 04:37 PM
Yes security theatre Act III has begun here in the US. Produced by Andrew Cuomo and directed by Bill de Blasio...
http://www.newsday.com/news/world/nypd-deploys-counterterror-forces-guards-french-sites-after-paris-terror-attacks-1.11123509
How did this type of attack get by not just French LEO and Intel folk. But by German, Greek and even ours?
Posted by: Herodotus | 14 November 2015 at 04:43 PM
you mean a France vs Russia confrontation ? that is not a theory, it's crackpot junk
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:02 PM
Yep, there is no curfew, as I said.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:03 PM
why assume a terrorist would be carrying his own ID?
Posted by: rjj | 14 November 2015 at 05:04 PM
See my reply below to jld. Same goes for you.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:06 PM
I've been paid for to be agressive most of my life, so thx for the compliment !
I'll explain the ground rules once, this goes for anybody, not you in particular: you can be agressive towards me (short of insult), I can take it and couldn't care less.
However, any explicit or implicit disrespect for the victims, any hint at excusing or justifying yesterday's attacks, and you're out.
You either step up to that standard or you step out.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:16 PM
I think this attack was planned for a couple of weeks at least. The thing with the passport is a hypothetical,as nobody knows yet if the dead terrorist is the same person who entered the EU as a refugee.
Biometric data and fingerprints are currently being analysed and compared with data collected by Greek authorities, which registered the passport holder upon entry into the EU.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:18 PM
Profound Condolences. Such heinous acts should not happen.
It strikes me as curious that a ragtag group of terrorists was able to determine the venue where France's President would be attending, far enough ahead of time as to be able to do coordinated tactical planning around it. Anomaly?
Posted by: Imagine | 14 November 2015 at 05:19 PM
I honestly don't know. Would be good if they had, sure. I doubt it though.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:20 PM
Same goes for you as for your alter ego "jld" ... you're treading on very thin ice
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:27 PM
With respect this is not a "War" it is a gang of criminals who should be wiped out.
To call it a war gives them a status they do not deserve.
Posted by: James Doleman | 14 November 2015 at 05:28 PM
General,
I totally agree.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:28 PM
Europe for Europeans. France for the French. Invaders to the sea, traitors to the firing line."
And stupid people back to school.
Posted by: James Doleman | 14 November 2015 at 05:29 PM
Sorry to be harsh but "Europe for the Europeans"?
My Muslim neighbour? my local London shop run by Sikh people? The Turkish men who empty our bins? Are they my enemy now?
Utter ignorance.
Posted by: James Doleman | 14 November 2015 at 05:32 PM
Pepe Escobar made an interesting response to this point, 'Why the hell would a jihadi going to paradise bring his passport with him?'
Posted by: DeWitt | 14 November 2015 at 05:34 PM
Following Socratic METHOD:
This link says much of it:
http://angryarab.blogspot.co.il/2015/11/some-observations-about-carnage-in-paris.html
Clearly --- these people claim ISIS, are like our own terrorists that cling to a type of hitler/anti-anti in our own country. ISIS has been so successful at creating an image that anyone with a grudge can adopt that message and follow thru. Jump on board.
Everyone with their remarkably STUPID strategy of helping jihadists to get WHAT YOU WANT -- should be exposed, fired and tried for incompetence. If you follow the Saudi press, much less the propaganda of their Wahabi money you can see the source.
MONEY has got to go!!! What kinds of decisions would the leaders of all stripes, be it corporation or government then make?
Posted by: Kim Sky | 14 November 2015 at 05:37 PM
I get your point, but I think you're misguided. There are a number of reasons to identify these attacks as something different than just criminal behaviour, including legal reasons.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:40 PM
Sure, valid question. But could ask the opposite as well:
Why the hell would a jihadi going to paradise NOT bring his passport with him?
Plenty of reasons for both arguments. Anyway, bionmetrics, DNA and fingerprints being analysed. We will know soon enough.
Posted by: Patrick Bahzad | 14 November 2015 at 05:44 PM
Valissa,
The West can deal with Wahhabism by dealing with the ME states that are spreading it (and backing its Jihadi proponents, such as IS, al Nusra, Ahrar al Sham, etc). And, I don't mean "do deals with"; there are already enough in place that are creating this mess.
Alastair Crooke has recently written a piece, "Obama and the legacy of the 'dark side'" that lays out this shameful chapter (it is not up yet on his website, Conflicts Forum, but should be in a day or so; well worth reading).
Posted by: FB Ali | 14 November 2015 at 05:46 PM
Appreciate the comment Patrick, but my worry about the "war" formulation is that is feeds into the narrative ISIS use, that they are "at war with the Crusader West"
Treating them as criminals seems to make more sense to me.
Posted by: James Doleman | 14 November 2015 at 05:49 PM