Paris.

[nuvola10]

I PRAY FOR FRANCE.Max .Rome,Italy.

[CJE]

Merci à tous.
Deeply moved by your messages.

Chris

[Paul Thompson]

Condolences to the French!

It is high time to attack those who send the murderers and to defeat them completely, wherever they are.

Paul

[byron-]

Very very wise Larry,

enough is enough.

[DDT]

My condolences to all the victims, their family and France.
Now its time to stand firm.
Pray for Paris...
Dirk

[Jukka Juutinen]

Originally Posted by Larry deZeng

Saddle up, lock and load and move out, Europe! If you don't, your children and grandchildren will be Muslims living in a Caliphate.
L.

Unfortunately that is not going to happen until:

-We get rid of people (in power) who believe that any thirdworlder is entitled to European social security. E.g. most of the academic elite seems to believe so.
-We get rid of "experts" who keep claiming that Islamic terrorism and Islam are totally separate affairs. They are not.
-We get rid of people who advocate the federalization of Europe. It does not work and never will and in the process castrates Europeans. Yes for European voluntary co-operation, no to feredal-EU.
-We need more Viktor Orbans and fewer Merkels
-Sweden is the sick man of Europe. It needs to be cured.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear All,

Exactly why are the two major branches of Islam at war with each other? What has fostered the extremism and cruelty of ISIS? Put more broadly, religion, in general, has likely been the cause of more wars than any other cause. Yet, religion supposedly calls us to our higher angels, to live in peace and respect our differences and diversity.

Yet, in the case of ISIS, I think ISIS will get what it is after, drawing the world into a war against it. It is the classic: "Be careful of what you ask for. You may get it."

Fomenting hatred should not be the creed of any religion. So, the question becomes, does ISIS represent a religion or just uses the Muslim window dressing behind which to cause much pain? Where is its justification?

Jukka, slamming Islam is not the answer. Look at all of the Muslims displaced by what is going on in Syria. You wouldn't invite that against yourself, regardless of your religion.

The French are now pissed. The Russians are now pissed. Perhaps it is time to invite China into the fray. I think Larry is on the right path. This is a war that we can no longer avoid. The separate militaries within Europe are rather small, but combined and committed, could, along with the major powers, turn the tide.

We also need to look at ourselves here in the U.S. and the fractious society we have become. Gun violence is rampant. There remains some truth that our society is discriminatory. The gulf between the left and the right is as wide as I've ever seen. Yet, we still make some progress toward a more enlightened society. We just need to find a way toward compromise rather than winner take all, which really means no one takes anything. So, too, is there a need for the world to, as Rodney King once said: "Why can't we all just get along?"

When I was young I had a fascination with turtles. I still do. I read an article in Ford magazine about a 2-headed turtle. The heads would fight over some morsel of food. One would get the honor of swallowing it, but, in reality, it headed to the same stomach. We are all going to die one day. Whoever has the most toys when that happens, wins. Balderdash.

What's really important is that we try to leave the world a bit better place than when we entered it. Owning mansions is ephemeral. Cooperating to try to reverse global warming for the benefit of our grandchildren is far more important than territorial gain.

Regards,
Richard

[Nick Beale]

Richard, Larry and Jukka,

This thread is about sympathy and condolence and is probably not the best place to plan the next war — many news comment sites are available for that.

[Larry deZeng]

Sorry, Nick, I must have missed something. The entry to the "Paris" thread reads:

Community > General > Paris

I failed to notice any words indicating limitations following the word "Paris", such as "Condolences to Paris" or "Paris - Prayers and Sympathy" or "Paris - Our Thoughts Are With You in This Time of Sorrow", etc.

So there must be a line or two in the rules that states how the title of a thread is to be interpreted? Perhaps it has to do with the gist or import of the first post with no allowance for a divergence of even 5º to port or starboard in subsequent posts? Or that the "authorities" are free to come along in page 2 of an existing thread and dictate a narrow theme for it on the basis of personal preference?

It would be very helpful to all of the membership if the "authorities" could set something down on this so as to preclude future mistakes and avoid embarrassment among well-meaning members.

In the meantime, I am sure Richard and Jukka join me in apologizing for adding some consequential thoughts to this thread. In view of the recent events in the "City of Light", I did not suspect others would find them disturbing, annoying, inappropriate or unwarranted.

L.

[Paul Thompson]

Hello Nick,

I am well aware of your position as a moderator. Nevertheless, I feel it would be appropriate to point out that your choice of words to describe the contributions of some members, that they are seeking "to plan the next war", is both prejudiced and deeply unhelpful. You could have emphasised the need to curtail political discussion in this thread without singling out well-meaning individuals.

Warm regards,

Paul