world

France bombs Islamic State HQ; hunts attacker who got away

53 Comments
By LORI HINNANT and THOMAS ADAMSON

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

53 Comments
Login to comment

So NATO knows the location of ISIS' headquarters.

And they haven't bombed it for the past year because ...?

24 ( +28 / -4 )

Burning Bush, now that we have some idea as to who actually started ISIS and other clandestine operations, we can also know the answer to your question.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

The Islamic State, al Qaeda, the Taliban, etc. are all spawn of the insane and hateful Wahhabist Sunni Islam that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States have propagated for decades. Until we and our true allies effectively counter it, the death and destruction will continue.

20 ( +20 / -0 )

Payback Time

7 ( +10 / -3 )

An Iraqi intelligence dispatch warned that Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi had ordered his followers to immediately launch gun and bomb attacks and take hostages inside the countries of the coalition fighting them in Iraq and Syria.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

@Burning: Do you have LINK ABOUT NATO INFO YOU MENTIONED.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Whether we like it or not, it's war, and the sooner we take it to them, instead of letting them take it to us, the better. We'll be reading and hearing about a lot more killing, without doubt. I can only hope our political leaders are up to the task of authorizing a heretofore unfamiliar form of warfare - asynchronis and covert assassination. Must play the same game, or lose.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

So next time there is a terrorist attack somewhere in the world that links back to France, that country has a right to bomb the hell out of some French town?

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

This has not worked so far and won't work in the future.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I know the french are angry, but the air campaign hasn't been successful at all so far. Unless Francois can hit places obama couldn't.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

'Whether we like it or not, it's war, and the sooner we take it to them, instead of letting them take it to us, the better.'

Unless my memory is failing me, we've been taking it to them and they've been taking it to us for a long time.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Among them, that the attackers were trained for this operation and sent back to France from Raqqa, the Islamic State’s de-facto capital.

Back when the news of the moment was the flood of refugees into Europe from Syria supposedly to get away from the fighting, there was an article here in JT and I made comments on about how police in Bulgaria had busted up a counter fit ring with hundreds of "blank" Syrian passports, and how people were buying them and using them to gain entry into Europe and at least two of the 8 dead (that's 25%) had used Syrian passports to gain entry into Europe. So it is not so hard to assume that there are probably more of them who slipped through and sad to say that these attacks will happen again. At least France has the military to project a reprisal against a known target, but what will happen if they strike in Belgium or some other European country that doesn't have the ability to project power? Will NATO step up and attack for them, and if not, then what is NATO supposed to do would be those countries should begin to ask.

Bad all around, and I hope that they get to the root cause and wipe all of these killers out now, before big business can see a huge profit margin from a long protracted war.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

"...that country has a right to bomb the hell out of some French town?"

No, because France has a proper security apparatus capable of pursuing the bad buys. Syria, in case you haven't noticed, does not.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

France called the attacks as" an act of war" while Obama treated it as "criminal case" in seeking to bring terrorist scumbags to justice. The Dems. even afraid to call the brainwashed terrorists as they are 'radical Islamist"! This is the dilemma of illusion and naivety on many who avoid to face Islam IN DEPTH, and as result, many innocent blood continue to shed. The Koran was organized when Islamic forces were strong many years after the death of Mohammad during early caliphate (see Uthman), and also few hundred years after Christianity. Now with oil money, the striving for caliphate is happening again, and not because Bush deposed Saddam Hussein. The sectarian clashes and cultural clashes with the West, namely "Democracy" is jihad to the weak minds. If there are solutions, THE WEST MUST ACCEPT THIS REALITY TO BE WELL PREPARED and ISLAM NEEDS A REAL RENAISSANCE AND REFORMATION instead of radicalism. Once again, this is too much to ask as seven years ago, the world counted on Obama for direction, and he said "not Iraq, but Afghanistan, and Putin of Russia is not the main issue". Talks are cheap when nothing to show for besides carnage in many places. The world needs a new direction, of course.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

What European Governments need to do is prevention. The prevention is better than revenge. If the country does not have Muslim population and then do not let root Islam religion in your country. As result of not having Muslim problems in your country, your country will have very good relationship with Muslim nations. It is prevention measure and you will never have Muslim enemy in your own country. You can't open your country border without restriction and ignore religion and culture differences between your own peoples and Muslim migrants. Muslims never integrate into non-Muslim society in western nations. Muslims will build Mosques and enclaves for themselves, and later they will try to convert local young peoples to Islam religion. Saudi and other Oil rich OIC members are financially supporting Muslim organizations that building Mosques and converting local youths in non- Muslim Countries.

Ideal family of Westerners’ couple was 2 children but Muslim couple has no limited and 10 children or more. Small country like Sweden will be taken over by Muslim population in a few decades if the Government didn't acknowledge the problem. If Muslims can't get the way they wanted in host country and then they will terrorize on host. The Police officers and outsiders can not go into some Muslims enclaves in France. France, Germany, UK, Holland and some of European nations have major Muslim migrants’ problems but they ignored because no one wants to be calling name by left wing Medias as racist or Nazi.

2 of attackers who involved in terrorism attacked are registered as refugee in Greek. How many ISIS trained terrorists are hiding in among Syrian refugees? No one has known until they below up themselves and shooting at innocent peoples in the street. UN, EU and World Governments must wake up and accept the truth, and no more lie.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

20 bombs is not massive, esp. if the typical 500 kg bomb carried by their multipurpose fighter airplanes. 200 bombs would be big, but only the equivalent of what3 B-52s could drop in a single strike. 2,000 would be massive.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

20 bombs is not massive, esp. if the typical 500 kg bomb carried by their multipurpose fighter airplanes. 200 bombs would be big, but only the equivalent of what3 B-52s could drop in a single strike. 2,000 would be massive.

Who needs Viagra?

-5 ( +2 / -8 )

JeffLeeNov. 16, 2015 - 10:22AM JST "...that country has a right to bomb the hell out of some French town?" No, because France has a proper security apparatus capable of pursuing the bad buys. Syria, in case you haven't noticed, does not.

So any country that doesn't have "a proper security apparatus capable of pursuing the bad buys" can be bombed contrary to international law? Who determines what "proper" is?

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

I see scary similarities between these terrorist attacks and those of 2001. Hollande said it was an " an act of war" GWB said "On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country." A passport proving the identity of an attacker was found http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/paris-attacks-syrian-passport-found-near-attacker-may-be-fake-1528823 http://911blogger.com/news/2011-11-14/fbi-agent-dan-coleman-explains-how-passport-911-hijacker-satam-al-suqami-was-found. Bombing started first in Afghanistan and Syria. And timing wise, a country was about to start selling oil in different way. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998512,00.html http://tribune.com.pk/story/990112/as-ties-thaw-irans-rouhani-in-historic-visit-to-europe/ http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/11/14/437567/Iran-France-Rouhani-Zarif-Europe. And then there was war.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

So, the main targets for this violence begets more violence campaign are.......buildings?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Read "Rhinoceros" by Ionesco. Resist the temptation to become one of them in order to fit into the new society. Go to work, the cafe, restaurant, theatre, and sporting event. When one of terrorists is capture, send him/her to the gallows. It may give him or her what he or she wants, but not on this earth.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Chop Chop - you nailed it exactly. I fully agree.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

A more clinical approach is required here. Something which the world could learn from Israel over the years.

Out here it appears as though one used guns and the other used fighter jets.

Result remain the same - death of innocent people on both sides.

So whats the score today?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Much as France is justified in bombing ISIS, it is exactly what the latter wants.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The jihadis are inside France and Europe, and Merkel keeps the barn door wide open --- and Hollande drops some bombs on Raqqa and talks big.

Talk about tragically missing the point! This demonstrates the cluelessness of the European elite in a nutshell.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Is Napalm still available?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Meanwhile, Obama, not to be outdone by Merkel, has just unloaded 10,000 Syrian "refugees" (all young males) in New Orleans in the last 2 days... without telling the governor about it.

Following in Angela Merkels footsteps...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

No, because France has a proper security apparatus capable of pursuing the bad buys. Syria, in case you haven't noticed, does not.

I'm not so sure about France's security apparatus. As far as I can tell, they haven't been able to figure out who stole the "explosives, detonators and grenades" from one of their army bases last July. The theft was reported be several papers right after it happened, and then complete silence.

Here are some pertinent quotes from this article:http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/07/explosives-stolen-from-french-army-base

Theft of explosives, detonators and grenades from Miramas site comes despite increased security after attack on Lyon chemical plant last month.

French authorities are investigating the theft of roughly 200 detonators plus grenades and plastic explosives from a military site in southern France.

The thefts at the Miramas site, which is operated by a combination of military services west of Marseille, appeared to have taken place overnight from Sunday to Monday. The break-in came with France on its highest level of alert for terrorism following deadly attacks in January and June.

...the thief or thieves appeared to have cut through a fence to enter the high-security site.

the outer fences were broken into, and that nine storehouses were affected.

about 160 civilians and soldiers work on the site daily, and guards with sniffer dogs patrol behind two fences separated by a “no-man’s-land”.

Wow, hard to imagine that a bunch of refugees could pull this off.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Bombing Syria is merely an act of revenge, killing innocent people in Syria, relatives of whom will become terrorist. Revenge with violence is not the solution, it only creates more violence. These terrorist actually grew up in Europe, i guess social inclusion would mitigate this in the future.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

It's time for Russia to join with the West and send in several million ground troops and just wipe ISIS out.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

@umbrella"to join with the West and send in several million ground troops"

What for ? Syrian Army can do it. Now many ISIS members are escaping airstrikes from Syria to Turkey and further, in Europe under false legends and documents. Allowing those "refugees" to arrive, Europeans dig a deep grave for itself.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

20 bombs is "massive"??

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Those bombing targets likely would've been in the to-be-bombed-soon list anyways, so the Americans gave the raids to the French so that the French could have a bit of revenge and show that they'd strike back hard and quickly.

@umbrella"to join with the West and send in several million ground troops"

What for ? Syrian Army can do it.

Well, they're getting trounced by ISIS before, but now with better air cover, they stand a chance.

If they could've done it by themselves, they would've retaken Palmyra by now, as they vowed months ago already.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The horror...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

What for ? Syrian Army can do it.

Well, they're getting trounced by ISIS before, but now with better air cover, they stand a chance.

Initially, the Syrian army was crushing ISIS. Then the US starting "going after ISIS", and that is when ISIS started making large gains. Then Russia finally had enough of this BS, and decided to truly go after ISIS, with much success. The US and her friends were terrified at the idea of being forced to join Russia to fight ISIS. But now with this Paris attack, they'll launch a big offensive against ISIS, but who knows what the real outcome of their actions will be, probably not good.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"It's time for Russia to join with the West and send in several million ground troops and just wipe ISIS out."

What about China?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Some parts of the world really needs a dictator to deal with the animals over there. It was working before.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It's time for Russia to join with the West and send in several million ground troops and just wipe ISIS out."

LoL. You mean, it's time for the West to join Russia. Before the Paris attacks and before that bomb blasted the russian airliner out of the sky, the russian military was pretty active over Syria.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I dunno, maybe tak some responsibility as a world leader?

They are already setting a good example as a world leader by staying out of the Middle East. Going into the country where they have no right being would make them irresponsible.

Oh, but the war has a lot to do with the Chinese, as it has taken a lot of money from people who might have spent a lot of it on more Chinese-made stuff...

Indirect at best. Hardly enough reason to invade another country and start killing its civilians.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

"They are already setting a good example as a world leader by staying out of the Middle East."

Lessee... if every country including Russia got out of the ME at this point, IS would probably soon be in control of much more of Syria and Iraq, and and that would be a good thing?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lessee... if every country including Russia got out of the ME at this point, IS would probably soon be in control of much more of Syria and Iraq, and and that would be a good thing?

No, but rarely in life do any options lead to a purely good outcome. Almost nothing is black and white. Right now, the west paints a target on itself by being in Iraq and Syria, leading to things like the Paris attacks. Being in the middle east distracts the fundamentalists from their civil war, and focuses their attentions upon us. Being in Iraq and Syria makes us more in danger, and we get no thanks whatsoever from the Middle East. The only people who have a good result from the current situation are the ones who make money off the military industrial complex. The weapons manufacturers.

So it's not a question of whether leaving IS in control of Syria and Iraq is a good thing, it's a question of whether or not we should be there - and the answer is that we shouldn't. If IS being in control of Syria and Iraq is a bad thing, then it's up to the Middle East to sort out their crap. And if they aren't willing to do it, then they obviously don't see it as such a bad thing.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

If IS being in control of Syria and Iraq is a bad thing, then it's up to the Middle East to sort out their crap.

Strangerland. But what if they can't sort out their disputes? Does the West just watch the heads roll, girls abducted and accept the fleeing refugees?

it's a question of whether or not we should be there - and the answer is that we shouldn't.

Maybe you're right, but we shouldn't just tolerate it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Strangerland. But what if they can't sort out their disputes?

There a millions of people in the various armies in the Middle East, vs. thousands in ISIS. If they can't sort it out, it's because they aren't interested enough to do so.

Maybe you're right, but we shouldn't just tolerate it.

No, we can strongly condemn it, and cut off their financial lines. No more giving money to Saudi Arabia (who is financially supporting ISIS), no more buying ISIS oil, and sanctions against anyone who does.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

This is just stupid, they bomb Syria more refugees will come to Europe after will be more terrorist attackcs after the refugees will backlash because people will think they're terrorist....and this circle will never ends... Europe please think for once!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Serrano: Lessee... if every country including Russia got out of the ME at this point, IS would probably soon be in control of much more of Syria and Iraq, and and that would be a good thing?

Lessee ... ISIS with Mediterranean naval ports and airfields ... hmmm ...

Strangerland: No more giving money to Saudi Arabia (who is financially supporting ISIS), no more buying ISIS oil, and sanctions against anyone who does.

That's not happening. There's not going to be a global sanction of Saudi Arabia. They can't even make ISIS sanctions stick. As I mentioned on another thread, around 300 black-market oil tanker trucks cross the border into Turkey every day.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love all of the people that think there should be no response. Let them go without anything. Let them butcher us like animals. No, don't react because they are religious so we should respect their views. Really? After we can put a man on the moon and understand particle physics we still have to suffer these outdated ideas about some camel-herder who went into a cave and convinced others he was more special than others? Really? I understand that most muslims are moderate but the problem is with religion. Humans need to get over it. Communism is a dumb idea but they got one thing right- religion is a poison. The only intelligent religious idea is "life is suffering"

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hardly enough reason to invade another country and start killing its civilians.

Weasel words. Assad is working with the governments who are conducting airstrikes, a lot of which are on his behalf. To call that "invading and killing its civilians" shows a pretty extreme bias on your part.

There a millions of people in the various armies in the Middle East, vs. thousands in ISIS. If they can't sort it out, it's because they aren't interested enough to do so.

Not interested? Really?

Look, I don't necessarily disagree with that you're saying, I've said it at various points in the past as well, but the question is what do you do when it's beyond the control of the middle east. There's an opinion that if you always do nothing then you're going to allow groups like ISIS to become stronger and there's no indication they have any intention of staying within their own borders. You might have the idea most of the time but not all of the time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

O'Malley said it best:

Muslims are our essential allies in destroying ISIS.

Bigots are so bigoted they can't see this.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Black Sabbath.

" O'Malley said it best: Muslims are our essential allies in destroying ISIS. Bigots are so bigoted they can't see this. "

If he meant local muslim authoritarian leaders with a secular outlook, such as Assad and Al Sisi, he is right. If he meant muslim clerics or organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, he is a hopeless fool. Name-calling like "bigot" is simply declaration of intellectual bankrupcty on the side of the caller.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

All the people backlash in the past refugees are necessary for the economy and shrinking population what you think about this attacks?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Initially, the Syrian army was crushing ISIS. Then the US starting "going after ISIS", and that is when ISIS started making large gains. Then Russia finally had enough of this BS, and decided to truly go after ISIS, with much success.

No, the Syrian Army was getting trounced by ISIS. Remember, ISIS formed first in Syria, even before Iraq. At that time, the US wasn't going after ISIS because ISIS wasn't yet in Iraq. The US didn't go after ISIS until after ISIS went into Iraq. By that point, ISIS already took control large parts of central and eastern Syria from the Assad admin. So no, ISIS already made large gains by defeating the Assad military even before the US started bombing them.

Furthermore, Russia isn't really going after ISIS. Most of their attacks are on western Syria, where much of ISIS is not. Most of ISIS is in central and eastern Syria. Russia is going after the western Syria rebels, not ISIS. They can't really go after ISIS unless they significantly advance forces towards central and eastern Syria, which at this point they're not doing. They would start with Palmyra, for obvious reasons.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

In 1741 an alliance was formed between the Saud clan and Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism) This gave al- Wahhab a vehicle to advance his interpretation of Sunni Islam and it gave Ibn-Saud an opportunity to seize more power. Back then the different Arab tribes were constantly at war with each other, raiding here and pillaging there, but all within the strict confines of longstanding Arab traditions. When Ibn-Saud, with his natural inclination towards conquest, partnered with al-Wahhab and his crazed interpretation Islam; it was now possible to throw tradition aside and go forth in the name of Allah and Jihad. Within 50 years this alliance controlled most of the Arabian Peninsula and was conducting raids into what is now Syria and Iraq.

In 1801 they attacked the Shiite holy city of Karbala in Iraq and massacred thousands of its inhabitants enslaving the rest. They destroyed shines and mosques and anything that they deemed unclean and that was just about everything. Their strategy was to pound the conquered population into complete submission and impose on them the strict form of sharia that al-Wahhab promoted. Sounds familiar. Eventually the Ottomans got tired of this and in 1815 they turned the Egyptians loose on them by 1818 it was pretty much game over.

They laid low for quite a while until the Ottomans got beat in WW I and then they came back with a vengeance. Once again, the alliance went on the war path and from the 1914 to about 1926 they conquered back all the major cities and were back in control. When the westerners started sniffing around for oil in the area the Saudi king read which way the wind was blowing and decided it would be a good idea to change the face of Wahhabism to make the Saudis appear better in the eyes of the western powers. It worked and the oil money started flowing in. For fundamentalist elements within the alliance this was not good, so they revolted against the king and started a civil war that lasted until the 1930s. In the end the king won. And mainstream Wahhabism changed. The fundies were down but not out and the spirit of al-Wahhab’s teachings is still a siren’s song for a lot of people.

It’s true that the petroleum driven foreign policies of the western powers have been a contributing factor in the mayhem we are witnessing now. But this mess started long before oil was a variable and even before the US existed. What we are seeing is just another act in a very long running drama. ISIS is just another movement to impose the pure teachings of al-Wahhab and undo the corruption of the Kingdom’s form of Wahhabism. In their eyes they are the cleanup crew.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yeah lets bomb those uncivilized countries to make more people homeless, and open our arms for them so they feel grateful to us and forget our bombs taking away their families and homes. Brilliant plan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I love all of the people that think there should be no response. Let them go without anything. Let them butcher us like animals. No, don't react because they are religious so we should respect their views

It has nothing to do with respecting their views, it's risk mitigation regarding a situation where we're interfering in a region that we don't have any right to be in in the first place.

the question is what do you do when it's beyond the control of the middle east.

If they don't request us to come in, then it's not beyond their control. We should only be there if they make a direct request to the United Nations to have a force come in.

My thoughts, and to be fair they may not be great ones, are that if this happens, any force that goes in should not have the markings of any nation on them - this paints a target on that nation. All markings should be UN markings and only UN markings.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites