
Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say - franzb
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/14/world/europe/paris-shooting-attacks.html
======
dang
All: when commenting here, as anywhere on HN, kindly remain civil and
substantive. Religious slurs are not allowed, nor are personal attacks.

We've closed this thread to noob accounts because of trolls. If you've got a
new account and want to comment here, feel free to email hn@ycombinator.com.

------
djfm
I live in Paris and was spending the night in the middle of the hot zone. I
was a few hundred meters from the Bataclan but fortunately the area I was in
was spared. I tried to get a Uber but they were unavailable, "State of
emergency, please stay home", the app said. I took a city bike home, rode
about 10kms and barely saw anyone in the streets all the way home. It was
really, really weird. I'm awfully sad that people can be proud of having
killed a hundred innocents. I'm not afraid, I'm just terribly sad. Please stop
this pointless killing.

~~~
Fluid_Mechanics
If we didn't need to secure their oil by supporting/deposing despots in the
region, and didn't want to provide the Israelis with
military/political/financial support then we would not be dealing with any of
this carnage.

Their attempts to fight back will only escalate the situation, and the carnage
will continue.

Edit: I'm not advocating that we not support Israel. I'm simply stating a hard
truth regarding "why they hate us".

~~~
13thLetter
Maaaaaaaybe wait until the bodies have cooled before you start searching for a
way to blame the Jews? :(

~~~
Fluid_Mechanics
This has nothing to do with blaming the Jews. The reason for all this carnage
is obvious and we shouldn't delude ourselves into thinking otherwise.

~~~
chroma
Obvious? I'm still not following. I can't figure out how somebody goes from,
"The US is responsible for the death and suffering of my countrymen." to
"Let's kill lots of French civilians."

------
livatlantis
In Paris right now. We are in shock. At both the scale and the extremely
coordinated nature of the attacks on civilians at multiple locations.

I work near rue Bichat and Le Petit Cambodge, a warm little restaurant in the
10e that my colleagues and I frequent, where people were tonight killed. The
Bataclan is a well-known concert venue for metal bands, where I've seen
several bands play live. Les Halles is at the center of Paris. Everyone who
lives here has close connections to these areas; they took place very close to
our everyday lives. Even those of us fortunate enough to know that our friends
are safe are reeling from what has happened.

This is the first time since the Second World War that France has declared a
state of emergency.

It's too early to come to any conclusions. It's too early to talk about
immediate and long-term ramifications, about connections to the refugees, how
these events will make France more 'communautariste'. That time will come, but
it's too early right now.

It's 2am right now, Paris is mostly awake. We mourn those who lost their
lives.

~~~
ianamartin
You have thoughts and good wishes coming from NYC and from Texas. I'm in New
York; my dad is in Texas.

My dad is a WW2 veteran. He fought on the front lines of Normandy Beach, The
Battle of France, and Liege, among other places like the Battle of the Bulge.

He was housed in France by people there who welcomed and supported him. He was
assisted by the underground resistance. He has an enormous amount of love for
the French people that he helped liberate and who helped liberate themselves.

There was a family that took him in somewhere in the French countryside and
fed him the first meal he'd had in weeks that wasn't out of a can. They cooked
food, washed his clothes, and gave him some wine and a decent bed to sleep on.

My dad is 96 now, and about 10 years ago the granddaughter of that family
tracked him down and sent him a letter telling him how she had always heard
about this man who came there to help them. He has treasured this person ever
since and stayed in touch with her.

When I talked to him on the phone tonight, he was in tears about what has
happened in that country he fought so hard to protect so many years ago and
the people who are experiencing what you are going through.

Best wishes to you and yours. From Texas and New York, Vive la France.

~~~
m_mueller
I'm neither French nor American nor a particularly emotional person, but your
post made me tear up. We Europeans all need to be more thankful for people
like your father who fought a war on foreign soil to protect a foreign
culture.

------
leothekim
Facebook has enabled their safety check feature:

[https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/paris_terror_attacks/](https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/paris_terror_attacks/)

~~~
eveningcoffee
What is this?

~~~
jacquesm
A way to let others know you're safe even if you can't get through to them
personally.

~~~
Asbostos
Does that have any value beyond reinforcing people's irrational fear of mass
deaths? What if you let your family know you're not one of the 100 killed in
this attack then die as one of the 600 murdered in France each year by common
crime?

I saw this happen with the London bombings. A colleague was almost in tears
because her son lived in London and she couldn't contact him on the phone. It
turned out he was fine, as approximately everybody else in the city was too.

~~~
leothekim
You answered your question without even realizing it. It is always ok to care
about your loved one, and it is always ok to reach back out to let them know
you're ok, no matter the medium, no matter the circumstance. It is not
irrational, it is human.

A college classmate on 9/11 died in the Windows of the World restaurant. Her
death may be a statistic to you, but it is not to me.

I remember trying to call friends in NYC that day, all the exchanges were
overloaded. I'm grateful that we now have ways to connect without worrying
about possibly preventing emergency calls from going through.

~~~
plonh
But Facebook only activates Safety Check on special occasions.

~~~
davidgay
Which are extremely likely to be the same occasions where calls/emergency
calls are not getting through.

------
jmspring
The repeated attacks, heavy immigration of refugees...I'm hoping for the best,
but I feel like there is a powder keg here. Whether or not it is based in any
fact, how this is handled and plays out is a serious concern.

~~~
vonnik
It's really important to understand the Muslim community in France, and not
evoke false connections.

We don't know if the attackers had anything to with the flux of Syrian
migrants moving across Europe now, but my guess would be: they had nothing to
do with it.

There are about 5 million Muslims in France, which accounts for about 7
percent of France's total population. France has deep, long-standing and often
troubled ties to several Muslim nations, notably Algeria. The French presence
in Algeria lasted from 1830-1962.

During the Algerian civil war of the 1990s, France was targeted by terrorist
attacks several times. One of those bombings EDIT: injured more than 100
people, which may be the number lost in the attacks today.

There are several basic facts that may help people understand why these
attacks happen in France (I'm going to make some crude and unsympathetic
generalizations that stem from the years I spent there):

* It's close to Middle Eastern and North African countries torn by conflict, notably Libya and Syria. These are training grounds for would-be attackers, many of whom originate in the west.

* Because of that, and of the fact that France rejoined NATO in 2009 and put itself firmly on the side of the US, it is also a proxy for the US, and will be targeted by those unhappy with American policies.

* It's racist. France has not dealt with the fact that people other than the French live on its soil. If you are the child of immigrants who were invited to France to help its post-War growth, you soon learn that a Muslim name will exclude you from many opportunities.

* Its economy is stagnant. France is no country for young men. They will face limited opportunities regardless of their ethnicity, unless they belong to the elite passing through the grandes écoles. This leads to a lot of frustration. When people cannot build a life in one direction, sometimes they are susceptible to morbid, violent ideologies.

* It's sloppy. I lived in France for 14 years, on either side of the 9/11 attacks on Manhattan. The French were really slow to put respectable security systems in place. CDG airport leaked like a sieve for years and I have no reason to believe that has changed.

Anyone who wants to know more about Islam in France should read Gilles Kepel:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Kepel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Kepel)

He wrote a particularly good book in the 1980s called "The suburbs of Islam".

~~~
Asbostos
Not that it makes up for it, but France also committed state-sponsored
terrorism (by any definition of the word) in New Zealand in the 80's. Though
they only killed one person with their bomb.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior)

~~~
001sky
Could you clarify how this would be "terrorism"? Terrorisms is not something
targeted like this. Whethor or not it was a war crime or treason or murder or
whatever (they plead guilty to manslaughter)...it's not a repeatable or
scalable type of situation and was never a threat to the general public.

~~~
gozo
That has nothing to do with the definition of terrorism. Groups who do
targeted attacks of sabotage that rarely kill people are also considered
terrorists. For example the Earth Liberation Front is regarded as terrorists
by the US.

[https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/dt](https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/dt)
[https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/september/domterror_09...](https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/september/domterror_090709)

~~~
001sky
Terrorism is anti civillian warfare. Planting sabatoge devices that kill and
maim innocent people is actually terrorism/ Is it just not as effective
because it maims more than it it kills? I don't get it with these pedantic
aruments.

eg lets say we load a bunch of shrapnel into a tree so it maims or permanenly
injures whoever the next logger is...tha is basically the same thing as
lobbing hand grenades into the public square. the attacks are meant to target
random people, caught unawares, in a way that conveys a persistant threat of
continued, scalable future action.

Now lets take some other shady randome violence like the KGB assinating a
civilian in London with radioactive isotopes in his tea. Is that terrorism?
No, its a specific threat carried out in a limited capacity against a
designated target. It might be criminal or a war crime or wahatever bad thing
describes it, but its not "anti civilian warfare", in the same way that not
all war casualties are "war crimes" in the normal usage.

~~~
gozo
Yes, the murder of Litvinenko is considered state terrorism by those who can
afford to say so. Its not considered random at all. They very publicly killed
someone who was an outspoken opponent of theirs. KGB has a long history of
both state terrorism and state-sponsored terrorism.

> THE senior British official was unequivocal. The murder of the former KGB
> man Alexander Litvinenko was "undeniably state-sponsored terrorism on
> Moscow's part. That is the view at the highest levels of the British
> government".

[http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/world_news/article6...](http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/world_news/article68531.ece)

You might think that some forms of terrorism are worse than others, but that
doesn't mean that those are the only forms of terrorism.

~~~
001sky
I do appreciate your point and the quote shows its not just yourself arguing
the other side of the case. But every act of violence or intimidation is not
"an act of terrorism". For god's sake what would you call the USA police vs
Black Unarmed people? I mean if that is not worse and more akin instilling
intimidation into people I don't know what is.

~~~
gozo
The problem with declaring the police as terrorist is that they also have
legitimate use and the aren't necessarily directly politically motivated. That
said, I could see how someone could claim that the crackdown of the civil
rights movement in the US in the 60s could be considered a form of state
terrorism. A more obvious example would be something like South Africa under
apartheid.

This is of course a slightly academic use of the word. Many people have a hard
time seeing even traditional domestic terrorism (like the unabomber) as
terrorism.

------
verta
Three Emergency protocols activated tonight to deal with the situation:

Plan multi attentats: Sudden surge of multiple situations

Plan blanc (in Île de France): surge of unpredictable activity of a hospital

Plan rouge: when there are significant casualties in a small area

~~~
verta
The prevailing laws and rights in an Emergency Situation are gist'ed here:
[https://gist.github.com/fasterthanlime/faa2ae629d22f325beb7](https://gist.github.com/fasterthanlime/faa2ae629d22f325beb7)

One important feature:

 _Closure of public places_

    
    
      Minister of the Interior or the prefects may
      "order the temporary closure of theaters, pubs and meeting places" and 
      "meetings of nature to cause or maintain disorder"
    

Wondering how the above affects the Internet/Mobile networks, even though they
weren't any reports of any throttling today.

------
iMark
I'm not entirely sure how I would define my guiding motivation in life, but I
swear "do no harm" would be part of it.

I despair at those who believe otherwise.

~~~
Cthulhu_
I'm not sure if I could keep a motivation like that if, for example, my family
was killed by a drone strike.

~~~
iMark
I'd try - seriously.

I don't know who came up with "an eye-for-eye and tooth-for-tooth would lead
to a world of the blind and toothless" but I believe it.

I'm sure it's something I'd struggle with when the hard choice arises, but I
honestly believe I'd try to keep to it.

~~~
aplummer
Yea but you weren't born with these ideas, you can't know how you'd be if you
grew up in a different context.

~~~
iMark
Nobody is born with these ideas.

~~~
chinhodado
I think by "born" he meant "growing up with".

------
rezashirazian
This is scary. This was a well coordinated attack that usually create a lot of
chatter before hand. Unlike lone wolf attacks these are somewhat easier to
detect.

The French intelligence and counter terrorism units are either not doing their
best or these terrorist are getting much better at covering their tracks.

~~~
yoodenvranx
How much "chatter" do you really need to coordinate something like this?

If it is a small group of just half a dozen people you should be pretty much
invisible if you act a bit clever. Coordination can be done via throw away sim
cards and personal meetings so you don't really need to communicate that much.

~~~
rezashirazian
Getting guns, grenades, creating bombs: These things take time, effort and
"chatter".

~~~
jacquesm
Somehow the assumption always seems to be that terrorists are stupid. They're
not stupid, they have seen some plots foiled so they adapt until they make it
through the next time. Footsoldiers they can afford to lose, just like the
drug trade can afford to lose shipments and mules. Getting guns and grenades
is relatively easy in Europe, many ordinary criminal gangs much less well
funded manage to get these. Making bombs is a bit more difficult but that's
one of those things that you only really need one guy for and some basic
tradecraft to get them into the hands of the people that will use them.

'Chatter' is a sign of stuff _not_ working as expected, if terrorists are half
as intelligent as I give them credit for they'll know to stay off the phone
and off the internet. You'd have a bigger chance locating them by the absence
of traffic than by traffic assuming they are not as dumb as we'd like them to
be.

Incidentally, and violating my own rule, that's why I don't believe in the
whole 'snooping makes us safer' rubbish. If anything it just increases the
size of the haystack for a constant number of needles.

~~~
draaglom
I don't think you have to assume terrorists are stupid, good OPSEC is hard.

Particularly re. phones / internet, it only takes one mistake to link a phone
number used for nefarious activities with your identity.

(I would expect them to use phones, at least - they have to coordinate
somehow.)

------
jondubois
This soils the reputation of islam. I know some good people (muslims) who
suffer from prejudice on a daily basis because of attacks like these.

Being a muslim in a foreign country is an increasingly difficult and isolating
experience.

~~~
imaginenore
Islam soils the reputation of islam. It has a massive problem of large
percentages of Muslims supporting (or being okay with) violence and terrorism.

42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35%
overall).

[http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-
ameri...](http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-
americans.pdf#page=60)

~~~
dang
> _Islam soils the reputation of islam._

No slurs, please. We've already banned one account for turning this thread
into a religious flamewar. Comments here need to stay factual.

~~~
imaginenore
I did stay factual, I even provided a link.

If you're going to restrict speech, restrict all mentions of religion, not
just the ones that contradict your preconceived notion.

~~~
dang
The part I quoted was not factual and was a slur.

~~~
deciplex
It's not a slur against Islam _in the slightest_ , it's a supposition, with a
link in support of it. If one-third of a population supports or tolerates a
heinous thing, then it is not unreasonable to claim that the reason the
population has a reputation for supporting or tolerating the heinous thing, is
that one-third of them actually do support or tolerate it. I don't think it
would be particularly controversial to say "American whites in the 50s had a
reputation for racism" due to widespread support of Jim Crow and segregation,
even if those things were not actually supported by the majority, but only a
significant minority. So it goes here.

My takeaway from it would be "why does one-third of this population support
this heinous thing?" but it's impossible to have that conversation with people
like you piping in and asserting that any interpretation of data that could
offend anyone's sensibilities, is off limits.

------
stephenhuey
My wife and I were just there for part of our honeymoon and literally flew out
hours before, around noon on Friday. Some locals had talked to us about the
recent attack some weeks ago and how they didn't want to let such people stop
them from living their lives. This day is worse but I feel like the lovely
people we talked to were determined, resilient and optimistic. God bless the
city with peace.

------
littletimmy
The war on terror has been going on for 15 years now - are there more
terrorists in 2000 or 2015?

Sooner or later, we will have to come to the realization that terrorism cannot
be eliminated by force. Stop destabilizing Arab countries, stop imperial
interference in Northern Africa, and perhaps we'll see an end to this
nonsense.

~~~
rythmshifter
I'm curious, under what logic would this stop or get any better if we allow
the cancer to grow?

~~~
TeMPOraL
War on Terror is _causing_ the cancer.

~~~
eva1984
So just give up and offer your good will???

~~~
littletimmy
To be clear, "giving up" here means stop screwing with other countries. Yes,
that's an outstanding strategy. While you're at it, also stop supporting
terrorist regimes like Saudi Arabia.

~~~
sampo
> _stop supporting terrorist regimes like Saudi Arabia._

In your earlier comment you wrote:

> _Stop destabilizing Arab countries_

Isn't supporting the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia pretty much supporting
stability? How can you stop supporting a dictator without a big risk of
causing destabilization (as happened in Libya)?

Seems like you want two logical opposities simultaneously?

~~~
littletimmy
Or it means that the US has a double-standard approach where it stabilizes
favorable dictatorships (Saudi, Qatar, Kuwait) and destabilizes unfavorable
dictatorships (Libya, Iraq) and democracies (Egypt 60s, Iran 50s).

How about getting out of other people's countries?

------
fasterthanlime
I've started a translation effort of the 'State of emergency' French laws +
some relevant press releases from the government:
[https://gist.github.com/fasterthanlime/faa2ae629d22f325beb7](https://gist.github.com/fasterthanlime/faa2ae629d22f325beb7)

Feel free to suggest improvements in the comments and/or request other
relevant documents to be translated.

------
hardcastle
"Evil thrives when good men do nothing" gotta put a stop to this

~~~
user_0001
What should be done?

Bomb the hell out of the Syrians? Surely they have suffered enough.

Iraq III? Maybe this time.... maybe....

Send the ground troops into Saudi? Quatar?

Acknowledging that some of ISIS / Al-Qaeda gripes do have some merit, stop
interfering in other countries affairs, stop propping up dictators because
they are "our" dictator.

Something else?

Unfortunately for the Syrians, my money is on bomb the hell out of them,
trying to limit the number of "collataral damage" of dead women and kids, but
hey, not our fault.

And so we go round the merry go round again.

~~~
asasasasasas
What if we were to remove our dependence on foreign oil?

Though fusion is a long way out, hypothetically, if we didn't have any reason
to interfere and could just leave the Middle East to figure out its own
problems, they wouldn't have a reason to see us as the enemy.

~~~
intopieces
In 2014, net imports accounted for 27% of the petroleum consumed in the United
States. 37% of that comes from Canada, followed by 13% from Saudi Arabia. [0]

Our dependence on foreign oil is no longer an excuse for our meddling in the
Middle East.

[0]
[http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=727&t=6](http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=727&t=6)

~~~
zaroth
I think our significantly decreasing reliance on foreign energy has put the
writing on the wall. Middle East countries used to pushing hundreds of
billions in oil welfare and running surpluses will be in serious deficit and
facing a decimated budget which will tank their economies. Perhaps the
thinking is to revolt now before the money is all gone? With such a strikingly
oil-centric economy, oil crashed from its high, steady technological progress
making their fields increasingly irrelevant over time... Cities built on $140
oil will sink back into the sand. Seems to me massacring innocent French
civilians only makes it happen faster.

We meddle a lot less overall in the Middle East the last 8 years than the
prior 8, right? If we don't then Russia steps up to do it themselves (for
better or worse US has no leadership there anymore so maybe why not Russia
give it a shot?)

In the end I personally don't believe the massacre is in any way "caused" by
US or other foreign involvement in the Middle East. This is not the first
caliphate, nor will it be the last, and it's not about righting wrongs or a
struggle for independence, it's literally about inflicting mass casualties on
the infidels in as an atrocious and terrifying (i.e beheadings) manor as
possible.

Over 100 murdered is a mind boggling atrocity but also a terrible security
failure. Not just in failing to catch and prevent it, but failure to take out
the shooters at the concert sooner. (I haven't read a detailed account of how
the shooters were stopped if there is one)

~~~
intopieces
Whether you believe it personally or not, the US involvement in the Middle
East - namely, support for Israel, funding of the Saudi regime since 1945 and
the arming of Wahhabis during the first gulf war - is the reason ISIS and
similar groups have flourished.

~~~
zaroth
You wouldn't need to provide much evidence to convince someone that the US
certainly makes a great excuse or scapegoat. However, to simply state the US
involvement in the Middle East is _the reason_ ISIS and similar groups have
flourished doesn't merely strain credulity, it ignores practically a
millennium of history, extremely complex political, social, cultural and
religious dynamics, and not to mention US support for Israel and funding of
the Saudi regime is at an all-time low, and at least as much if not more
weapons came from USSR/Russia than the USA. So I assume you're just trolling.

The reality, I believe, is much closer to the same reason it always comes down
to when men commit acts of brutality in order to subjugate or terrorize a
population. They do it because of ego, pride, opportunity, and a desire for
establishing their own power, not because someone else made them do it or in
seeking justice in face of tyranny.

If anything, I think it's more likely the premature US withdraw from the
Middle East and a lack of stronger support for Israel which has contributed to
ISIS flourishing. A perceived faltering of support between two allies is the
best invitation for increased pressure and targeted attacks (physical,
political, clandestine, and otherwise) against the bonds between those allies.
It doesn't surprise me at all that countries and religious fanatics with the
stated goal of the destruction of Israel would work tirelessly to popularize
the notion that if only not for the US "supporting Israel" the Middle East
would somehow be more stable.

Mostly I pin the blame for the flourishing of ISIS collectively on the Middle
Eastern countries which themselves have epically failed to confront the rising
threat of ISIS on their own turf, while doing seemingly everything possible in
their own domestic policies to in fact encourage ISIS recruitment. Assad'd
deployment of chemical weapons is mirrored in Egypt's own treatment of
citizens in Sinai, and over and over again throughout the Middle East, we see
effectively a ceaseless and brutal civil war stretching back, what, 1400
years, only interrupted by periods of apparent calm when one tyrant or another
manages to temporarily cement themselves so far above reproach that their own
raping and plundering goes uncontested for a relatively short while.

The Middle East has been facing endemic war between Islamic sects basically
for the entire history of Islam itself. The "holy wars" (call it barbarism or
medievalism) being carried out in the name of Islam (by so-called "Islamic
terrorists") is evidence enough that this is not actually problem of foreign
policy, but a deep seated and historically pervasive domestic problem.

The inescapable "defunding" of the Middle East over the next few decades is
unsurprisingly leading to a surge of sound and fury, signifying little, and
ultimately will disappear in a whimper. These are countries which by and large
by their own actions and circumstances have squandered a most incredible glut
of natural resources (as is human nature) and as that era comes to a close in
relatively short order, will bring with it a humanitarian crisis throughout
the region, which frankly, neither the US or any other World power, is either
responsible for, nor has the political will, nor even the available resources,
systems, or infrastructure to adequately address.

The massacre in France is abhorrently evil and sensationally shocking.
Statistically, it is a drop in the bucket. I can't even comprehend, for
example, the scale of horror and violence which is being inflicted daily
against disenfranchised Muslim women and girls who are married into bondage,
raped, and brutalized, as a token reward / enticement for ISIS recruits, even
wrapping this torture in a veil of propriety and calling it Sharia.... A
sickness like that, to me, can only be understood, explained, spread, and
ultimately eradicated domestically.

~~~
intopieces
>"Mostly I pin the blame for the flourishing of ISIS collectively on the
Middle Eastern countries which themselves have epically failed to confront the
rising threat of ISIS on their own turf, while doing seemingly everything
possible in their own domestic policies to in fact encourage ISIS recruitment"

ISIS formed in the power vacuum created by the United States toppling Saddam
Hussein. [0,1] So yes, the country that had its leader and military demolished
was unable to combat the rise of ISIS, you're right. But pinning the failure
on them is to ignore the reasons they failed to do so.

>The Middle East has been facing endemic war between Islamic sects basically
for the entire history of Islam itself. The "holy wars" (call it barbarism or
medievalism) being carried out in the name of Islam (by so-called "Islamic
terrorists") is evidence enough that this is not actually problem of foreign
policy, but a deep seated and historically pervasive domestic problem.

To collapse the rise of ISIS into the same civil wars that have been raging
for the past millennia and a half is the same willful ignorance of the complex
cultural history that you deride in your first paragraph. The roots of ISIS
are in Wahhabism, a faction that existed mainly in Saudi Arabia. It wasn't
until Roosevelt met with King Ibn Saud in 1945 (following the discovery of oil
there in 1938) that this nation had any serious ambition at exporting their
brand of Islam further in the middle east. Then, with the Oil Crisis of 1973,
Saudi Arabia proved its political power and was able to leverage it against
the United States. When it came time to expel the Soviets from Afghanistan,
_the United States armed the Mujahadin, a proudly Wahhabist faction_.

The US being _the_ reason that ISIS has flourished is not an opinion, it's the
conclusion made over and over by analysis of historical facts.

[0][http://www.cfr.org/iraq/islamic-
state/p14811](http://www.cfr.org/iraq/islamic-state/p14811) "The group that
calls itself the Islamic State can trace its lineage to the aftermath of the
U.S. invasion of Iraq, in 2003. The Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
aligned his Jama’at al-Tawhidw’al-Jihad with al-Qaeda, making it al-Qaeda in
Iraq (AQI)."

[http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-
inte...](http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-
isis-prisoners/) [1]"More pertinent than Islamic theology is that there are
other, much more convincing, explanations as to why they’ve fought for the
side they did. At the end of the interview with the first prisoner we ask, “Do
you have any questions for us?” For the first time since he came into the room
he smiles—in surprise—and finally tells us what really motivated him, without
any prompting. He knows there is an American in the room, and can perhaps
guess, from his demeanor and his questions, that this American is ex-military,
and directs his “question,” in the form of an enraged statement, straight at
him. “The Americans came,” he said. “They took away Saddam, but they also took
away our security. I didn’t like Saddam, we were starving then, but at least
we didn’t have war. When you came here, the civil war started.”

ISIS is the first group since Al Qaeda to offer these young men a way to
defend their dignity, family, and tribe."

~~~
jacquesm
Dutch proverb: If you sow wind you will reap storm.

------
po1nter
According to iTele there are now 118 dead.

Edit: Now it's up to 140. What a sad day :(

~~~
toyg
Reworded to avoid offence (hopefully): deaths are not irrelevant, but _their
exact precise number_ is irrelevant. What matters is the scale of the security
failure, compounded by the fact that they suffered a similar one less than a
year ago and they were currently on high-alert (because they've only just
started bombing Syria).

The knowledge that a network could carry out such a widespread and well-
coordinated attack without being preempted, in a situation of maximum alert,
will heavy on the minds of any French citizen _regardless of whether victims
were 118 or 119_. Basically, the French security system has been revealed as
completely ineffective. _That_ is a huge problem.

~~~
sosborn
> Basically, the French security system has been revealed as completely
> ineffective.

How can a country possibly prevent these things while still maintaining a free
society?

~~~
Cthulhu_
They can't; even the not free societies - think prisons - are not safe. People
that want to do Bad Things will do them. Even if they didn't have guns or
weapons, they could've - for example - get enough people into a dinner party
or restaurant, have everyone grab a fork, and start stabbing people in the
eye.

Terrorism doesn't need weaponry. The only deterrent would be to read people's
minds, and you've probably watched Minority Report and other such dystopian
scenarios. It's something that needs to be solved at the root, and TBF I don't
believe it can be fixed.

~~~
DrScump

      Terrorism doesn't need weaponry. 
    

Indeed. Even if you deem well-coordinated attacks with just edged weapons
(like the fictional ones in "The Following") unlikely, note that the Multiple-
Victim public homicide with the most fatalities in US history used _not a
single firearm_.

(and I'm _not_ talking about 9/11, although it could count as such as well)

------
Bud
Latest breakdown of fatalities available, from CNN and other sources:

    
    
      114 and still rising at the Bataclan theater
      19 at Le Belle Equipe bar
      14 at the Cambodian restaurant
      4 in the area of the Avenue de la Republique
      4 outside the Stade de France (remarkably low death toll here given that there were two suicide bombers there)

~~~
laichzeit0
It would be interesting to see the number of wounded. There is usually a
disproportionate amount of people wounded vs fatalities.

------
blisterpeanuts
Headline unfortunately is out of date. It's well over 100 deaths, according to
major news sources, and unknown wounded. Just tragic and senseless.

------
6stringmerc
Of all the wonderful and dangerous developments that technology has granted
our species, I'm saddened to think that we have yet to find a pathway to the
human spirit that can help reduce hatred and the impulses that result in such
terrible actions. From school shootings in the US to warlords in distant
lands, there's so much yet to achieve in the name of progress, for human kind.
Surely, we have much to do, and as tragedies continue to befall people of all
nationalities, creeds, and colors, reaching for betterment hopefully can be a
goal for us all. The sun shall rise tomorrow, and I truly hope each new day is
one we can use to its fullest for the pursuit of life.

~~~
Asbostos
Don't worry. Driverless cars are coming and the lives they save will quickly
outweigh all deaths from terrorism and mass shootings. The US will be such a
massively safer place without those 30,000 road deaths each year. It'll be
able to sustain another 9/11 incident every year and still be safer than
before. So I don't think we need to solve this problem. We're already well on
the way to solving the real problems. Terrorism and mass shootings are
negligible and don't need to be a priority.

~~~
6stringmerc
You're missing the point - at the root of all societal discord is an
intellectual and emotional disconnect, which is, practically speaking, now
easier facilitated by technology. That is, people fueled by hatred are much
more driven and capable of mobilizing with technological advances than groups
who wish to address the root causes. Driverless cars are simply a "feel good"
development, along the lines of bariatric surgery. I'm talking about getting
deeper into the human psyche for the benefit of all mankind, which isn't a
"negligible" type of pursuit. Also, if society valued lives via driving,
people would be subjected to more rigorous testing using technology, not
simply cut out of the loop.

------
131hn
Café, croissants, gouter d'anniversaire, et ce soir, j'irais voir Spectre
parceque merde (i'm in Paris)

( Café, croissant, birthday party, and tonight, i'll go watch Spectre - as
previously planned, because f.. them. )

------
kevindeasis
From reddit

ChickenInASuit8h535: ISIS aren't really trying to "solve" anything in the
countries they're attacking, the main motivation behind these attacks is to
widen the rift between Islam and the West and bring more moderate Muslims over
to their side

alpual7h345: And I'm sure backlash and discrimination resulting from this
attack will further alienate Muslims in France. I'm sure that's part of their
intention, and I wonder why I don't see that being discussed much. Thanks for
pointing that out.

~~~
cLeEOGPw
This is a losing game for us. If we don't make ANY backlash, then the
terrorists will be encouraged to repeat attacks, as they see there are no
consequences for their actions. Additionally, French will be more afraid of
Muslims and will surrender whatever they have to them even more willingly, as
they would feel helpless. On the other hand if we make backlash, more muslims
will radicalize, again, increasing terrorism frequency. The only solution I
see is finally admit that multiculturalism is a lost cause when only one
culture actually trying for it to work (us), and expel all muslims that don't
fit our culture, PLUS invest heavy money into converting current muslims to be
more like us. Ban certain practices, etc.

~~~
kevindeasis
San Francisco seems to be a great example of multiculturalism. I have to admit
that I disagree with a good amount of the things you said. I think that we
will need multiculturalism to move forward. If we look back into our past,
terrible things have come from preventing multiculturalism. What do you think
about my statement?

~~~
cLeEOGPw
What terrible thing came from preventing multiculturalism? None. On the
contrary - terrible things happened BECAUSE of multiculturalism. Several
groups of people cannot live as a community when their ideas of a community
are different. "Multiculturalism" is only possible when the cultures WANT to
live together. In our case here in Europe, whites want to live together with
muslims, but muslims don't. Ant that is the problem. We can not fix it, only
muslims can. And if they won't fix it, terrible things WILL happen. We are
doing our part. It's time for other cultures to do theirs. And if they won't,
we will have no choice.

------
laichzeit0
French should be concerned about losing more liberties due to knee-jerk
reaction from politicians wanting to "do something". Mass surveillance under
the pretext of anti-terrorism.

Be alert.

------
staunch
I hope the people in Paris for the dotGo conference are okay.
[http://www.dotgo.eu/](http://www.dotgo.eu/)

------
kid0m4n
We visited France/Paris for our marriage anniversary back in June; and the
city left a lasting impression on for over the course of 4 days.

All I can say is; don't change your fundamentals. Then they have won. It's
just a larger version of your bitcoin demanding DDOS bandits. Once you give
in, humanity will fail.

I am more worried about the innocent people who are going to suffer because of
this.

------
olliepop
Every Twitter user has jumped aboard and is using the hashtag #PorteOuverte
which is intended to help Parisians find a safe place to stay during these
attacks. It's even trending in Australia. This shows that Twitter is a
successful news aggregation and trend following service, but also proves its
failure to be a platform for meaningful communication.

~~~
theseatoms
How has it failed as a platform for meaningful communication? Aren't you
reporting its success in this area?

~~~
NickNameNick
People expressing something (sympathy, judgement, whatever) are crowding out
the messages of people trying to co-ordinate requests for support and offers
of support.

It's cool that the twitter user in Australia has a message of sympathy. But if
you urgently need a safe place to stay in Paris, and you can't find the people
making that offer, in a place meant for that offer, because the non-parisians
are making too much noise, then that's a problem.

~~~
theseatoms
Ah. I misread OP's comment.

Yeah, that's bad situation.

~~~
saryant
The feature isn't easy to find but you can limit a hashtag search to tweets
near you. On the results page, click on "More Options" and select "Near You."

------
dylanvalade
100+ is terrifying. While it's still morning here, 80,000 people are estimated
to have already died today.
([http://www.worldometers.info/](http://www.worldometers.info/))

If these reports are accurate then we have a staggering average above 4,000
violent daily deaths.
([http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/7/2/104.full](http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/7/2/104.full))
([http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/67403/1/a77019.pdf](http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/67403/1/a77019.pdf))

------
roadbeats
Calais Jungle (where refugees stay) is on fire:
[https://mobile.twitter.com/Harryslaststand/status/6653291703...](https://mobile.twitter.com/Harryslaststand/status/665329170340155392)

------
tn13
Prayers for those who died and their family members.

A reminder than the free societies must remain and and continue to defend
themselves despite such terror attacks. It is important that politicians don't
cave into the political goals that these terrorists might have.

------
Animats
The US terrorism alert level has _not_ been raised, and there are no US
terrorism alerts from Homeland Security following this.[1] PJM and CAISO (the
two biggest US power grid operators) aren't showing any emergency actions or
warnings. So the US anti-terrorism community isn't seeing an imminent threat.

[1] [http://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/11/13/statement-secretary-
jeh-c...](http://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/11/13/statement-secretary-jeh-c-
johnson-situation-paris)

~~~
13of40
And let me tell you, my evening was pivoting on what the terrorism alert level
would be today. It was double-plus-orangy-red before, right?

------
pknerd
I am as saddened as on Paris shootings and killing of innocents like I'm
shooting and killing of thousands of Muslims in Syria, Palestine, Iraq and
Kashmir.

I hope Western Society/Media or elsewhere will not bring faith factor in
discussion just like they don't bring it up during US shootings or killing in
Palestine or elsewhere.

------
ausjke
This will only get worse over time, in Europe and in US, more so in Europe as
Europe is frankly slowly Muslimized(by 2050 they may become majority). It's
the new reality. Western culture is under serious attack and the system is not
designed to cope with terrorism like this _at_all_.

Without security, talking about freedom is meaningless.

------
uxwtf
118 dead reported by AFP (80 inside Bataclan concert hall) and 4 terrorists
executed by special forces

~~~
kgwgk
executed?

~~~
Swizec
Made unalive.

I'm guessing snipers.

~~~
kgwgk
That definition made me smile.

But executed has a quite definite meaning, I think. If anything, the
terrorists have been executing people tonight.

------
SebKba
Really sad. It's also depressing to see the response from politics. Border
controls and more police presence. How likely is that to solve the underlying
problems?

------
nkg
It keeps getting worse.

------
bane
My heart and thoughts go out to the French people, Parisians and those who
were killed and injured and their families.

Je suis français

------
ioab
Condolence for the lost ones' families and Paris people. Such a tragedy for
all humanity.

------
clock_tower
I'm very curious about where the attackers got those firearms. France isn't as
heavily disarmed as England, but it isn't exactly the United States for
firearms availability; if any of the offenders' weapons can be recovered, I'm
sure there will be interesting things to learn from their serial numbers.

~~~
kryptiskt
There are open borders in most of EU and it's a piece of cake to buy automatic
weapons in eastern Europe, gangs in Sweden import theirs from Slovakia for
example.

~~~
clock_tower
I hadn't known that it was as bad as that! (Other posters here mention old
Soviet arms caches, and the general surplus of weapons spread by the fall of
Communism.) It sounds like the UK benefits quite a bit from being on an
island... (Are they in Schengen or not?)

~~~
e12e
The UK and Ireland are outside of Schengen. Hence the improvised
refugee/homeless camp on the Calais side of the tunnel.

------
bryanwbh
This is saddening to see how others view precious lives as a commodity.

To those in Paris, stay safe.

------
usaphp
I don't understand how can you talk about ISIS, Nazis and Communists in the
same sentence? Communism has nothing to do with violence compared to ISIS and
Nazis...

Edit: Why downvotes? Idea of communism does not propose violence, Nazis and
ISIS on the other hand do.

~~~
andreasvc
There has been plenty of communist-inspired violent terrorism. Germany's RAF,
Italy's Red Brigade, Japan's United Red Army, Peru's Shining Path, Columbia's
FARC, Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, etc. etc. Saying these are not real communists
is just a No True Scotsman. As soon as people start believing in utopias
there's a danger that they will cross a line.

~~~
coldtea
> _As soon as people start believing in utopias there 's a danger that they
> will cross a line._

More people have been killed in pragmatic endeavours, like colonialism, and
land grab/turf wars, than from "utopias".

This includes smaller scale utopias -- far less innocent people have been
killed by ...hippies than by policemen.

~~~
andreasvc
You're not contradicting anything I said, I wouldn't claim utopias are the
only reason for people to become violent. I do believe that true believers
such as with religions or utopias are particularly dangerous. Did you reply
this way because you approve of communism?

~~~
coldtea
> _You 're not contradicting anything I said, I wouldn't claim utopias are the
> only reason for people to become violent._

Well, why single them out then if both sides can be dangerous?

If you think they are the "more dangerous", then I think the previous 2
milenia of bloodshed for pragmatic land/power grabbing, including WW I, refute
that.

Besides, even so-called utopians are quite pragmatic in their actions. When
Mao executed tons of people, it wasn't some "utopianism" guiding him, but a
very pragmatic power grab to stay in power and get rid of possible contenders.

(You might say that this was only possible because his subordinates were
deluded by some utopian zeal. But lots of other cases, from the Belgian
colonies and Pinochet to Indonesian "death squads", prove that you don't need
that to have mass killings, just unquestioned power and the upper hand).

> _Did you reply this way because you approve of communism?_

No, I replied this way because I approve of utopias. The US was one too at
some point -- for persecuted from Europe religious nuts.

Also because I like being objective, which needs taking all sides into
account. Of any binary (utopia/pragmatism e.g.) I'd never say "the first is
dangerous" if the second has been historically proved just as dangerous.

------
jayess
Clearly more NSA surveillance is needed.

------
ctdonath
FWIW: The recent book "Day Of Wrath"
[http://www.dayofwrathbook.com](http://www.dayofwrathbook.com) predicts where
such attacks are going.

------
zxcvcxz
I've seen a lot of HNers suggesting that we must over react and ramp up the
war on terrorism. I'm all for cutting off immigration, but how will ramping up
the wars do us any good? I don't see how another ten years "fixing" things is
going to work.

~~~
Cthulhu_
It won't; a lot of people are radicalising just because of the 'war on
terror'. As I said in another comment, what would you do if your family was
bombed in a drone strike?

~~~
DGAP
Wow, you literally side with the terrorists over the victims. Illuminating.

~~~
ceejayoz
I think the point is that drone strikes that kill innocent victims can be a
source of radicalization. Ignoring that aspect of our foreign policy would be
idiocy.

------
coldcode
Right now we don't know who these people are, where they came from and what
their aims were (besides terror). Of course terror is exactly this, you don't
know, you imagine the worst, and everyone reacts, often pointlessly. I wonder
why France?

~~~
imaginenore
We know exactly who they are: islamists. We have video recordings where you
can hear them yelling "allahu Akbar" while shooting.

42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35%
overall).

[http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-
ameri...](http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-
americans.pdf#page=60)

~~~
auntienomen
42% is appalling, but so what? What's your conclusion? (Recall that a majority
of Americans have no problem with dropping bombs on foreign civilians.)

~~~
imaginenore
42% in a western non-islamic country is huge. My conclusion is that Islam is
not compatible with the western cultures, with things like freedom of speech,
freedom of religion, personal freedoms, and it's a huge mistake for Europe to
allow so many of them in. You don't have to believe me, listen to the muslims
themselves talk about it:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU&t=138s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU&t=138s)

~~~
deciplex
Have you noticed that Muslims in e.g. the US and Germany are by and large
_less_ radical than the broader population there? Islam doesn't seem to be
particularly incompatible with Western culture, rather it seems to be
incompatible _with France_. And I doubt it's something about French culture in
particular either - if I was looking for what the difference is the first
thing I'd do is look at French domestic policy and whether any of that stuff
disproportionately affects immigrants or Muslims.

------
narrator
I have have a few twitter accounts with news on very narrow topics, for
example, machine learning news, and other niche technical topics. I just went
through them all and anyone who mentions the Paris attacks gets unfollowed. If
I ever want news about shocking violence going on on the other side of the
planet with my Machine learning news I'll resubscribe. I get inundated every
day with too much information. Getting the same shock news through 30
different channels is just ridiculous. Everyone thinks they're the modern day
Paul Revere when really, I already know, and they're just being annoying.

