Nice wasn't really a "lone wolf" attack as far as we know...the French police have arrested several people who probably were accomplices of the killer.
But thanks for the timeline.

The World's Gone Mad.

There's only one possible solution, a high octane road war.

Better repair my bicycle and put a mean sticker in somewhere.. =/

Yep, the investigation is still going on. When I write "lone" it's just to mean that it was one guy who did the action "directly" instead of doing a coordinated action like in Paris or Brussels.

BTW, as the news today were focused on France, I haven't caught the development on Ansbach : did the guy made the bomb himself or did he get some "help"?

I don't think that's known yet...police are still investigating.
Some strange things seem to have been going on...apparently a few weeks ago the suicide bomber and an interpreter (also an Arab) went to police and denounced another asylum seeker as a member of Hisbollah (which couldn't be substantiated).
On top of Islamists wanting to kill us infidels we might also be importing the Sunnia-Shia conflict. Great times...

Wow a normal person in this thread...
Terrorists either stop when the grievances are addressed (like in Northern Ireland), or when the perpetrators realise what they are doing isn't ok (like the US terrorism in Cuba) or when the perpetrators are completely wiped out (usually causes multiples new ones to come up).

For civilized western countries, the uncivilized and undeveloped middle-eastern countries are a real "damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma.

Do nothing = "What? The Western countries don't care about ISIS or Saddam or Gaddafi or al-Assad oppressing and killing the hapless people! Why aren't they doing anything?!?"

Do something = "The western countries are deliberately killing the middle-eastern children and puppies! Damn them!".

Or alternatively: "It is western countries fault that when a maniac dictator was ousted from Iraq/Libya/Afghanistan, even crazier islamistic wackos instantly took power!". As if the people and civilizations in the area have no responsibility how and what kind of people there take power? Is it really that the countries there simply can't be civilized, they either will be lead by crazy islamists, or iron hand dictators? I personally think the main reason crazies like ISIS or Somali warlords take power is because they have quite a lot of support from the people living in the area.

So do you feel western countries shouldn't have done anything about ISIS? Or what should they do? Can those countries ever hope to live in a civilized manner?

It is telling that the only real democracy in the area is Israel...


tl;dr: I'm fed up with the allegations that it is mostly western countries' fault that the people in said areas just don't seem to be able to live in a civilized manner, with freedom of speech, true democracy etc.

They should not have done anything about Iraq and Afghanistan. Just like they should not do anything about Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan now. (they are allies, so they won't, but just to have some similar examples)

How about now? Shouldn't they do anything about ISIS, but just let it grow? Maybe that's what the people in the area deserve, they don't know how to live in any other way.

I guess the only way to keep the people in those countries from sinking into total chaos was to have iron-hand rule by Saddam and Taleban. There just isn't any other way but those two for them: dictatorship, or total chaos.

I wonder what would happen to North Korea is Little Kim and his regime suddenly vanished. Would they be able to come up with some democratic civilization (maybe with the help of South Korea), or would it simply sink into a similar hellhole as middle-eastern countries (without dictatorship)?

Or how about DDR, Poland. Spain? When they were freed from their dictatorships, how come they were able to become democratic countries, instead of some wackos taking power? Why does it seem so impossible for middle-eastern countries to have a similar progression?

no idea

Assad is still in power, does not seem to help. Total chaos did not come to Iraq or Afgh. because Saddam or Taliban lost control, it happened because of war.

depends on how they vanish, with a terrible war it would surely not end well. if the change comes from within, things might improve. But with the threats from outside, the gov has good justifications to continue the hardline.

outside threats ended, change from within without war

If I can handle your brand of crazy, so can you. Hang in there. Of course they have. Lookit all this self-aware realization:
http://bloom.bg/2a9LrJh
http://bit.ly/1XUSzqs
http://bit.ly/2a56wAC

You don't have, say, security personnel at nightclubs as a failsafe and a guarantee that there won't be any problems, but as a deterrent. So why don't you save all that cussing for those who are actively trying to kill you?

To be fair, the West can and should rightly be held accountable for creating the right conditions for the emergence of the groups that are now threatening it, with Libya being only the most egregious recent example. But it's like you said, damned if they do intervene (imperialists!), damned if they don't (we must save them from themselves!). Fact of the matter is, those areas never needed an excuse to slaughter each other (and others) throughout their history, for much longer and bloodier periods than even ol' cantankerous Christendom, and the most important step - after securing the borders and rooting out theopolitical threats to the West's way of life from within the West - is definitely non-interventionism.

To all Muslim immigrants: Your religion seems to breed violence. Keep your comrades in check or the mood of the citizens of the guest countries might switch. Yes, this is a fucking threat.

---

i think that in the end, europeans will run for shelter in syria because all arabs already went to europe