Sad about France

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

I wouldnt want my government spying on me to stop ISIS, Id rather see our armed forces deployed...

Hahahahahaha, and while your armed forces deploy, more and more people turn radical (which is why the Iraq '03 invasion was bad), and as the spy services are not doing anything, you get more and more attacks, public opinion turns against the troops being there and they're pulled out.

oceanhawk wrote:

Little harder for the "Islamic Extremests" to get from the Middle East to N.America, wouldnt you say? A lot easier to get to Europe...

That's why the biggest terrorist attack in history was in the US.

Like the owner who's entire family work there, all just so happen to miss work that day.... first time Larry ( the owner) didnt show up for work in 20 years...

03 was bad, but Id rather fight than have it any other way

oceanhawk wrote:

9/11 is the only conspiracy I believe..

Like the owner who's entire family work there, all just so happen to miss work that day.... first time Larry ( the owner) didnt show up for work in 20 years...

03 was bad, but Id rather fight than have it any other way

And about that Larry guy you talk about, what about conincidence?

Oh, so you'd rather have a million civilians die and millions more radicalized than just sit back and watch how it plays?

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

9/11 is the only conspiracy I believe..

Like the owner who's entire family work there, all just so happen to miss work that day.... first time Larry ( the owner) didnt show up for work in 20 years...

03 was bad, but Id rather fight than have it any other way

Dude, for conspiracies to be conspiracies, they can't make complete sense. And 9/11 was no conspiracy. It was real and it was an attack by Al Qaeda.

And about that Larry guy you talk about, what about conincidence?

Oh, so you'd rather have a million civilians die and millions more radicalized than just sit back and watch how it plays?

I dont think they fought it right, if there was a common enemy like ISIS, that even the Iraqi government were against, then it would be a defo boots on the ground for me.. But because of the war back in 03, Im still a little skeptical

oceanhawk wrote:

Nope, 9/11 Conspiracys are true,

I dont think they fought it right, if there was a common enemy like ISIS, that even the Iraqi government were against, then it would be a defo boots on the ground for me.. But because of the war back in 03, Im still a little skeptical

Putting boots on the ground is risking lives for nothing.

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Nope, 9/11 Conspiracys are true,

I dont think they fought it right, if there was a common enemy like ISIS, that even the Iraqi government were against, then it would be a defo boots on the ground for me.. But because of the war back in 03, Im still a little skeptical

Ah, but here's the thing. Prove that the 9/11 conspiracy is true.

Putting boots on the ground is risking lives for nothing.

Fo Nothing? There a bunch of terrorists beheading people and destoying peoples lives... So you are saying we shouldnt fight them?

9/11 Conspiracys are true, but we outta move this to another thread

oceanhawk wrote:

There is a risk in every action we take, besides our surrender.

Fo Nothing? There a bunch of terrorists beheading people and destoying peoples lives... So you are saying we shouldnt fight them?

9/11 Conspiracys are true, but we outta move this to another thread

1. Dude, we just stop them from entering Europe and thwart their attacks with massive cyberespionage and surveillance.
2. No, I never said we shouldn't fight them. After all, the Coalition are bombing the shit out of them. I'm saying we keep ourselves to ourselves, prevent terrorist attacks on European soil thanks to intelligence agencies, and that we support the YPG.
3. Prove them to be true.

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

There is a risk in every action we take, besides our surrender.

Fo Nothing? There a bunch of terrorists beheading people and destoying peoples lives... So you are saying we shouldnt fight them?

9/11 Conspiracys are true, but we outta move this to another thread

1. Dude, we just stop them from entering Europe and thwart their attacks with massive cyberespionage and surveillance.
2. No, I never said we shouldn't fight them. After all, the Coalition are bombing the shit out of them. I'm saying we keep ourselves to ourselves, prevent terrorist attacks on European soil thanks to intelligence agencies, and that we support the YPG.
3. Prove them to be true.

Yes surveillance, but not on everybodies personal stuff... The government shouldbt be going through my emails...

Are you saying, fight Extremests, who are attacking us because of our freedom, fight them by taking away our liberty and freedom.. nice job

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes surveillance, but not on everybodies personal stuff... The government shouldbt be going through my emails...

Are you saying, fight Extremests, who are attacking us because of our freedom, fight them by taking away our liberty and freedom.. nice job

1. If they don't go through people's emails, they'll never be able to find the unknown of terrorists.
2. No, I'm saying we get our priorities right and we defend Europe first.

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Yes surveillance, but not on everybodies personal stuff... The government shouldbt be going through my emails...

Are you saying, fight Extremests, who are attacking us because of our freedom, fight them by taking away our liberty and freedom.. nice job

1. If they don't go through people's emails, they'll never be able to find the unknown of terrorists.
2. No, I'm saying we get our priorities right and we defend Europe first.

Going through my emails, about barrista tips wont help will it?

And do you really think that people planning an attack would use emails, sms etc?

oceanhawk wrote:

Giving up our liberties is what they want! Dont you get it?

Going through my emails, about barrista tips wont help will it?

oceanhawk wrote:

And do you really think that people planning an attack would use emails, sms etc?

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Giving up our liberties is what they want! Dont you get it?

Going through my emails, about barrista tips wont help will it?

You trying to say you are a viable threat...?

oceanhawk wrote:

And do you really think that people planning an attack would use emails, sms etc?

What else do you think they use, snail mail?

deep web, etc a lot more... Nobody really using email..

oceanhawk wrote:

Giving up our liberties is what they want! Dont you get it?

Going through my emails, about barrista tips wont help will it?

And do you really think that people planning an attack would use emails, sms etc?

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Giving up our liberties is what they want! Dont you get it?

Going through my emails, about barrista tips wont help will it?

And do you really think that people planning an attack would use emails, sms etc?

Dude, reading emails is a way of speaking. Intelligence services have to monitor webs and communication methods to be able to catch terrorists. Only terrorists need to be afraid.

but giving up liberty to fight people who are fighting to destroy our LIBERTY.. doesnt make sense..

oceanhawk wrote:

but giving up liberty to fight people who are fighting to destroy our LIBERTY.. doesnt make sense..

Pablo22510 wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

but giving up liberty to fight people who are fighting to destroy our LIBERTY.. doesnt make sense..

It doesn't. We still have freedom of speech, we still move around freely. It's just giving up a little bit of privacy to be able to stop them. If you don't like it, I know who to blame for the next terrorist attack.

And if u think going through peoples emails to stop a lone wolf shooting will do something,wow..

Going through "suspected peoples emails" is different, that grand..

oceanhawk wrote:

Do we have freedom of speech?

And if u think going through peoples emails to stop a lone wolf shooting will do something,wow..

Going through "suspected peoples emails" is different, that grand..

Did you know that the Nice terrorist wasn't suspected of being a terrorist, and was contacting other unknown terrorists? If the French government had access to them, we would have been able to stop a massacre. It's either sacrificing a little bit of our privacy for security.

oceanhawk wrote:

deep web, etc a lot more.

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

deep web, etc a lot more.

The deep web is just sites not indexed by Google etc. that you need Tor and such to find. It isn't anything special.

Terrorists use it to communicate..

oceanhawk wrote:

No its not special, but government agiences cant really hack peoples coms there, and guess what..

oceanhawk wrote:

Terrorists use it to communicate..

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

No its not special, but government agiences cant really hack peoples coms there, and guess what..

They can and do.

oceanhawk wrote:

Terrorists use it to communicate..

They also use Facebook and Twitter to recruit....

Yep, because how many people use social media from the dark web?