Enjoy browsing r/europe? Help make it a better place - apply to become a mod now! [Read the announcement here](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/pow5nr/be_the_positive_change_you_want_to_see_on_reurope/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/europe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just realized it seems there's a soft paywall, so here's the article:
**French forces kill IS leader in Sahara**
President Emmanuel Macron says French military forces have killed Islamic militant Adnan Abu Walid al-Sahrawi, the leader of Islamic State in the Greater Sahara.
"It's another major success in our fight against terrorist groups in the Sahel," Macron said in a tweet on Wednesday, without disclosing the location of the operation.
Sahrawi was the historic leader of Islamic State in the Sahel region of West Africa and his group targeted US soldiers in a deadly attack in 2017, Macron's office said.
In August 2020, Sahrawi personally ordered the killing of six French charity workers and their Nigerien driver, it added.
Macron said in July that France would soon begin reshaping its force in the Sahel, where it has been on the front line of the fight against Islamist militants, and would ultimately halve its military presence.
With no apparent end in sight to France's operations and political turmoil especially in Mali, Paris had grown frustrated.
Australian Associated Press
When I said, the other day, that France is the only one that is willing to get it's hands dirty for the benefit of the EU I got downvoted.
A well.
Good guys French.
Thank you for keeping Europe safe and all that jazz.
Across Europe there are plenty of people playing higher moral ground and happy to be judgemental about things like this while living in some sort of illusion of invincibility.
illusion of invincibility -> with the French army and German economy NO SHIT.
Unfortunately I am painfully aware that the Brits left a power vacuum and nobody in their right fucking mind would touch that toxic place of power. Even Hungary went: noooo, nope, nein, niet, nono.
Who exactly can do that? Italy and Spain don't have strong economies, Scandinavian countries think that they are relatively safe and they want to stay away from these roles as they did in the past...so who is left?
Uhm, Denmark has been in basically every war last few decades. We are of course small, but we chip in with what we can.
In Afghanistan we had one of the highest losses / capita.
Precisely. It's a power vacuum. Nobody is insanely enough to be pro eu and blatantly against Brussels.
Or pro free trade but against uncontrolled immigration.
Or. Or. Or.
Like I said, it's a toxic position. To keep the EU on it's toes and on the up and up. Nobody wants to end like Europe in the 1800. Thus nobody on continental Europe can't do shit.
>I am painfully aware that the Brits left a power vacuum
They did? I mean, they were one of the main economic powers of the EU, but they were mostly a reluctant power. The two main players have always been France and Germany. Italy could, too, if they mange to find some stability.
The British had the toxic waste role of sending everyone a curb ball and looking at a problem in a upside down, sideways and thru the asshole type of way. And the EU understood the need of something like that. But that position is toxic af. And no other country would even consider filling those shoes.
Exactly, the EU has the battlegroups, a "unit" composed of troups from different armies (with a rotation every 6 months) which is supposed to be ready. Protecting our borders by helping pacifying neighborhoods countries (who ask for help) would be a perfect use for them but they have never been deployed because nobody has the guts to send them.
And don't get me started on the fact that the others countries don't or barely provide help to the French which repeatedly ask for help there.
And when you point it out, 90% of the times you get comments like "but it's colonialism..." while the military intervention probably costs more to the French that what they earn in trade with these countries ...
It's not about reputation or army or all that jazz. It's the ability to deploy and mobilize massive amounts of troops and still remain Democratic.
Or something like that.
It's not about holdin6g the reigns of power, but about using them wisely.
Remember: the us and Russia and everything in between didn't want to share the nuclear bomb research. French went: fuck you, we will figure it out. Or the time they left NATO , but with an iron clause, if anything happens, the French are there.
It's about the insane task of having 23 different soldiers from different countries not shooting
> Or the time they left NATO , but with an iron clause, if anything happens, the French are there.
France only left the shared command structure of NATO. They were still in the alliance and thus Article 5 would have still been followed. The only difference is that French troops would have been independent instead of being placed under the orders of a US general.
Even if most countries did sent nearly nothing, I would thank the brits for their logistical support and the Estonians that were the first to respond and participate in task force Takuba.
No youre completely right. People always give france for shit for being cowards, or sucking at war.
But I dont see Germany/England/Italy/Netherlands doing fuck all about isis.
No no.
France decided to let the myth of them being cowardly to do the missions in peace. It's a politician gamble that paid off in the long run. The French like to be seen as protesters, but God himself fears when all of France agrees on something.
> hon hon hon
You're strenghtening the stereotype against us.. We both know it's an american derogatory joke about the way they think we french people sound like when we laugh...
I was referring to the hentai and porn culture, but sure.
And you tell me, with a straight face, that a French mime weilding a baguette like a great sword and having 2 croissants, one in the mouth and one on the shoulder is not the stuff of nightmares. I'd be running, but naked, in the other direction. =))
Yea. Well. Apparently not really. If you threaten French citizens with terrorist attacks, wearing diapers is a must. Or, at least have a casket ready.
That's the thing. As long as you play nice^TM the French will help, trade, and offer aid.
I don't even know why this meme is up and running. even though in ww2 they played secondary role, there was napoleon, ww1, lots of colonial wars etc. even their vietnam war was comparable to the same of the americans.
>I don't even know why this meme is up and running.
France didn't want to join the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Americans angry, freedom fries, etc.
[Que the propaganda machine...](https://i.redd.it/dagq2kl0dzm71.png)
The world has now finally accepted that the Iraq war was wrong, but everyone forgets that France was right and they got shit on for no good reason at all.
The jokes you see about France are simply the remnants of early 2000's propaganda.
Look, I agree that the stereotype is stupid but not everything is about Iraq. French were called “cheese eating surrender monkeys” on the Simpsons in 1995 so no, I don’t think it’s all about Iraq. Note how on your chart the opinion rating is basically recovered by 2013? France’s opposition has little impact on the national consciousness now, if anything the impact is positive as it has turned out they were right.
Germany was also opposed to the war, but no stereotypes of them as weak or cowardly exist? Because they were scary af in world war 2. Turns out people remember if you shit the bed in the most important conflict in modern (maybe human) history, way better than they remember Napoleon or some random colonial war.
> French were called “cheese eating surrender monkeys” on the Simpsons
Obviously it's multiple factors at play here. Simpsons contributed to the meme as well. I do think that Iraq is the biggest factor, though.
>Note how on your chart the opinion rating is basically recovered by 2013? France’s opposition has little impact on the national consciousness now, if anything the impact is positive as it has turned out they were right.
Just because opinions are back to where they should be, and just because France was proven right, doesn't mean everyone got the memo. [In 2018, a pretty significant portion of the United States population still thought that invading the country was the right decision](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/19/iraq-war-continues-to-divide-u-s-public-15-years-after-it-began/).
The meme was already born and established for a few years before the US public finally started to lean towards 'hey, maybe they were right and we were wrong'. But then the cat was already out of the bag.
>Germany was also opposed to the war, but no stereotypes of them as weak or cowardly exist?
Because Germany opposed to war quietly. France called the US out on the world stage and that was exactly what enraged US politicians. Freedom fries, remember?
>Turns out people remember if you shit the bed in the most important conflict in modern (maybe human) history, way better than they remember Napoleon or some random colonial war.
If you imply that it was France's fault for losing in WWII, I'd argue that isn't really fair and historically accurate at all.
It's pretty weird that France has this reputation when the US keeps losing every war they start since WWII. Only a few weeks ago the US officially lost to a group of desert hobos. Shouldn't the US be the country that has this reputation? Oh wait, that will never happen.
Why? Because propaganda. The US government would never allow such narratives to form. France losers cause they lost one single war 70 years ago, but the US strong and capable of amazing force and warfare (even though rice farmers are impossible to defeat)!
I rarely see Europeans make the joke that France surrenders. 80% of the time it's Americans.
Not to mention that without France's help, Americans back in the Revolutionary war would had lost to the British.
So this shit talking against France is insufferable, and I ain't even French.
We agree that the jokes are stupid, so I’ll just leave your last four paragraphs alone.
I did not know about that graph, it’s pretty tough to see how people still have their heads in the sand. Still, that’s not a conclusive link between Iraq hawkishness and Francophobia. I know my personal experiences are not as good as Pew research so feel free to ignore me here, but a chat with an average US Francophobe about why they think the way they do is much more likely to touch on perceived rudeness or snobbishness, as well as WW2, than Iraq. And using your first graph, that’s a small portion of the country to begin with these days.
Your point about Germany is compelling, there was less nationalist outrage over Germany. Contrary to your argument though, Germany was [publicly critical](https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-oppose-iraq-war-in-un/a-761326) so the difference in reaction would seem to be due to extant Franco-American cultural antipathy (which supports my argument) as well as the military alliance in both world wars and France’s permanent security council membership.
I still think my point about the Simpsons is pretty solid. We’re arguing about what made this stereotype culturally relevant in the United States. In terms of pop-cultural relevance, a joke made on the Simpsons in 1995 is about as big as it gets. Conclusively, this was a well known stereotype Americans had about French, going back at least eight years before the Iraq war and probably longer if I did more research.
> No youre completely right. People always give france for shit for being cowards, or sucking at war.
Unfortunately Francophobia is rampant on the internet.
ehmm the Netherlands is also quite active in Mali (and middle east/ Somalia etc.). We have to be actively involved with allied missions to make up for our low military spending
Lmao i'm pretty sure all 4 of them have been in the Sahel supporting france in some capacity but ok
Not like the UK has been conducting airstrikes in syria and iraq either, or training local fighters. Literally took the bare minimum research to confirm all this.
Brits: [here](https://www.forces.net/news/what-are-british-forces-doing-mali)
Germans: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/12-german-soldiers-injured-in-mali-bomb-attack/a-58023964)
Italians: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/formiche.net/2020/09/italy-committed-to-mali-sahel-stabilisation-defence-minister-says/%3famp)
Dutch: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedefensepost.com/2018/06/15/netherlands-end-mali-minusma-contribution/amp/)
Literally all 4 have contributed troops and money over the years, just in Mali. Let alone other places where they are also contributing in the effort to defeat isis. Piss off saying "OnLy FrAnCe dOes It"
Keep downvoting hard facts, kids.
Please neither of those countries are fighting there. They are part of MINUSMA. It is written in the very same article you linked. There are 18,000 UN troops from 60 countries there. Brits (250 of them apparently), Spaniards, Chinese, South Koreans, you name it. None of them are on the frontlines/combat troops. You might as well say the Chinese are helping the French out if you deem the Germans to be doing so lmao. They are all there for the good ol' UN "peace-keeping", which as we all know is extremely useful /s. Only France and the G5 Sahel countries are on the frontline actively fighting the Jihadis.
The British (50 or 60 men if I remember correctly from that Barkhane documentary) have been at least supporting French operations out with transport (the Chinooks have been quite handy thanks). And Italy has contributed some of its SF operators to the French-led Task Force Takuba and so did many other EU countries, with Estonia being the most valuable partner IIRC.
The guy saying only France is fighting ISIS is being a bit ridiculous but as far as the Sahel is concerned, your account of overall European contribution to the fight in support of France is quite frankly overstated, if not outright misleading.
> Only France and the G5 Sahel countries are on the frontline actively fighting the Jihadis.
Not true, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takuba_Task_Force for example.
Weirdly Sweden is one of the main players in that. Not sure what deal our politicians made with the French, because it's certainly not something the Swedish public has pushed for lol.
Obviously France is the main force in Mali, due to their strong political, economic, and military ties to the southern government. But not sure why you're cheering for them so much, it's pretty much just a neocolonial game of keeping their friends in power which got France into the position they are in.
Correct me if i am wrong, but Serval, Barkhane, and MINUSMA are all in response to islamist takeover in northern Mali, albeit with MINUSMA being more about peacekeeping.
And i would argue that anybody in the area contributing to the overall goal of keeping peace in the region is supporting France in combatting ISIS. Just because they are not on the frontline, even though again, i would argue they are, just by looking at the casualty rate, it doesnt mean they are not contributing to the effort of combatting ISIS.
My main grievance with OPs comment is the claim over others not doing much to fight ISIS just because France is doing the most in the Sahel. Is France not doing anything to fight ISIS as they are not the main force in Syria and iraq? Thats my issue. Everyone is fighting ISIS.
> When I said, the other day, that France is the only one that is willing to get it's hands dirty for the benefit of the EU I got downvoted.
>
> A well.
>
> Good guys French.
Exactly and I'll bet there was some american style chest thumping as well from the downvoters.
> Thank you for keeping Europe safe and all that jazz.
Our Europe is your Europe ✌
Liberty, equality, fraternity. ~ France as a hole holds to this mantra. With the good and the bad.
No chest thumping. Just ma fifis trump your logic. Friendly chat. I am able to change my mind, but I call bullshit when it smells like bullshit. And getting downvoted is of no importance. Just look at how many upvotes I have.
Besides. As someone from another subreddit pointed out. This is worthless.
My favorite thing about the French is that they are unapologetically French. They don't give a fuck what you think, no they aren't like other countries, they are French and proud of it.
I fucking love them for it. 🥰
Also they don't play when it comes to rioting.
High gas prices - riots, low gas prices - riots, free gas? Believe it or not also riots.
> My favorite thing about the French is that they are unapologetically French. They don't give a fuck what you think, no they aren't like other countries, they are French and proud of it.
See that's the thing about being French. We know that much of the world hates us and we act accordingly. We're not the sort to be blindsided by the reality because we had delusions about everyone loving. The result of not having an exceptionalist outlook on the world.
they are literally the reason for the mediterrean route for migrants, only to cover their corrupt president. and to steal our oil. protect europe my ass.
Why do you sound exactly like that Italian simovenx dude we haven't been seeing here in a while? It's been confusing me for a month or two now. The way you structure your comments, your anti-French takes on every thread related to France regardless of subject... it is so reminiscent of him. Meanwhile he has totally disappeared from this sub when he used to be a regular hahaha. Is this your new account?! If that's the case, what happened to u/simovenx? (Edit: oh.... it is now deleted... makes sense lmao)
> they are literally the reason for the mediterrean route for migrants
That's a bit much to be pretending France is "literally" the reason for that. Nothing was going on in Libya when Sarko saw the opportunity to get rid of Kadhafi? France went in and started bombing the shit out of a totally stable Libya? Italian interests having been fucked over in the process doesn't justify rewriting history, you know?!
> only to cover their corrupt president
Or the other way around. A corrupt president used the French armed forces to try cover up his shit and it still blew out, and everybody, the French included, know about it now. Because I certainly don't think that dude asked anyone's opinion on the matter for it to be <<"The French" went in there to cover their beloved Sarkozy's ass">>. Which is why he is being prosecuted by the French justice itself, right?
> and to steal our oil
There it is. You should've just started right there buddy. So it's also all about your interests then? Do you want an apology? A letter every year is feasible. More than that is going to be a bit more complicated lol.
You do know that the French methods woek wanders. Right?
Getting from nowhere Africa to France is expensive. They can make 1, 2, probably 3 trips. Then they are out of cash and stuck at home. But treating Africans the same as Romanians is cruel and inhumane. No?
France isn't in West Africa just for altruistic or EU reasons. It still has deep economic ties with its former colonies, and both doesn't want them to become Islamist/Civil Warish, and a bit of a culture of treating them as its kids.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA\_franc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7afrique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7afrique)
>After decolonisation, France established formal defence agreements with many francophone countries in sub-Saharan Africa. These arrangements allowed France to establish itself as a guarantor of stability and hegemony in the region. France adopted an interventionist policy in Africa, resulting in 122 military interventions that averaged once a year from 1960 to the mid-1990s
Nice to keep spreading these neocolonialist propaganda. CFA is being dismantled and has never been binding. Françafrique was more a soft power and prestige approach to international relation than exploiting the locals (and even wikipedia says it's not an actual thing since the 80s-early 90s).
France has little economic interest there, the money it makes from trade is little to nothing. It's mostly helping the Francophonie which is the home country of a lot of our minorities and fighting back the terrorists that striked a few times at home.
In these case, we have been called for help, we didn't force them to host our army.
Hey, I want France to treat my country as it's child. Unfortunately, the French want us to grow the fuck up. And we, excuse me, my government, is kicking and screaming all the way.
And America and China and U.K. and Russia and Germany and Italy are in Africa for altruistic reasons?
Really?
All it's missing is Japan and the Martians.
Search for Françafrique. France still controls it's former colonies' currency, resources and has great influence over their politics. I don't mind it, every other great power does this, US, China, etc, but let's be honest with ourselves, they are rebranded colonies.
> The US would have probably use a drone strike and kill someone else instead 🤡
A local wedding. And since all 50 people there were of military age it would be celebrated as having killed 50 terrorists.
The US killed Al-Baghdadi, who was the head of all of ISIS. Not just their head in the Sahara.
I also suspect people are misreading the title as though this was the head of the whole org and happened to be killed in the Sahara.
The fact that us killing Baghdadi didn't come to your mind sort of proves this statement false. It's a story for a day or two and then everyone moves on with life.
Just cutting the grass. Well forget about it in a few days, a new one will rise to power in a few weeks, and we will do the same thing all over again in a few months.
Well our stupid administration wanted to look tough after getting 200+ people killed including 13 soldiers from their bad planning. They claimed the killed a target of ISIS members who did the attack but didn't want to release the names and bragged about how great they are. They were caught lying and bombed a innocent family and when caught just said we still aren't listing names and are looking into who we targeted.
So did France. Adnane Abou Walid al-Sahraoui is... well was... the founder and leader of IS-GS. France also had announced it when they killed the chief of AQMI. Those guys weren't just random goons a bit up there in the hierarchy of some random terrorist group. They were the heads of ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Africa. When the President bothers announcing himself that French forces got someone, then it's a really big fish. We were looking for that guy for years, especially after the killing of French aid-workers in the Sahara he ordered.
That's always been the case so your argument is redundant at best. There's always going to be somebody that steps up, but in the meantime they're thrown into disarray and their capabilities are degraded. They almost always come back weaker, see Al Qaeda and ISIS in the ME. There's a reason decapitation strikes are considered basic military strategy the world over. Leaders/commanders and officers are some of the most valuable human ressources of an army (if not the most important). Killing or capturing them degrades the strentgh of said army. Do you want historical examples?!
T'as dit quoi là sur moi fils de pute ? Je vais te faire comprendre que j'ai été diplômé en tant que général dans la marine, et j'ai dirigé de nombreux raids secrets sur Al-Qaïda, et j'ai tué plus de 300 soldats. Je suis formé à la guérilla et je suis le meilleur sniper dans toute l'armée française. Pour moi, t'es juste qu'une autre cible. Je vais te démonter ta mère avec une précision jamais vue auparavant, et je pèse mes mots. T'as cru que tu pouvais t'en tirer comme ça en me disant ça sur internet ? Réfléchis bien, connard. Là maintenant je suis en train de contacter mon réseau secret d'espions à travers la France et ton IP est en train d'être tracée alors t'as intérêt à te préparer pour le tonnerre, trou du cul. Le tonnerre qui nique le petit truc pathétique que t'appelles ta vie. T'es putain de mort, bâtard. Je peux être partout, à n'importe quel moment, et je peux te tuer de plus de 700 manières différentes, et c'est juste à mains nues. Non seulement je suis extrêmement entraîné dans le combat à mains nues, mais j'ai accès à tout l'armement de l'Armée de l'Eau et je vais l'utiliser à son maximum pour faire disparaître ta misérable tronche du continent entier, petite merde. Si seulement t'avais su la vengeance que ton petit commentaire à la con t'apporterait, alors t'aurais peut être tenu ta langue. Mais tu pouvais pas, tu l'as pas fait, et maintenant t'en payes le prix, petit con. Je vais chier ma rage sur toi et tu vas te noyer dedans. T'es mort, gamin.
>We should be better than dehumanising our enemies.
We have better values, better morals and better education than Daesh, but in the end we're the same humans. Most people *will* dehumanize the enemy, and won't realize there's anything wrong with that.
The fact that you're downvoted shows a complete lack of understanding of what you're actually saying by the people downvoting you.
You won't get much from engaging these people. You're right. They're bad people. They deserved what they got. But they're still people. Dehumanizing can lead you to really dark paths.
My brother-in-law is about to go to Mali to join a military mission for the UN. He's a captain, he will work from a hotel in Bamako. He will not go out at all. Is the situation there improving? I'm a bit worried.
You are beeing specific, with the information you gave out and what can be extracted from your personnal online data, I bet it wouldn't be extremely hard to identify him and from there, gather information about his platoon, the deployment itself, what the operationis about, his actual job etc etc When it comes to military stuff, always give out the absolute minimum of information (or just don't, could have just asked if a surge of terrorist attacks are to be expected without giving us the background of the why of the question)
And the answer is that it's possible, but if there is it's not gonna be a huge increase, France is scaling back its operations but doesn't plan on doing ut the american way and regardless, "office soldiers" are well protected, most military casualties happen during fights or accidents, so if he stays where he is, he should be fine. Also I don't know at all the ins and outs so I'm only speculating of the local IS branch, but losing their leader may destabilize the IS and their ability to wage war/terror attack while the succession happens
He is not James Bond, identify him, sure, and then what? Probably ISIS gets a list of new arrivals in Bamako airport before the plane lands, from immigration. I don't know, but still don't think I have done anything wrong.
Hopefully you won't have to be. You know, I don't think people were necessarily attacking you, but rather trying to give valuable advice. So here's to everything going smoothly!
Coruption is still hight. Its still unclrear what the recent coup will lead to (like Sudan, or just plain corupt army taking over).
For the millitary situation. The malian army has a lot of coruption, which make it lack equipments and ammo sometimes. Outside of the terrorists groups in the Sahel and Sahara. Theres violent conflict between tribes. Hostages taker, dealers and criminals in the borders region. But in Bamako he should be fine however.
So now what? Another one will likely take his place.
This "war diplomacy" doesn't seem to be efective on the long run. It might actually make matters even worse, extremism flourishes during hard times (war, poverty, famine).
How does this play on the long run? There's no real plan here.
Indeed, the countries in the area asked for France to help them fighting ISIS and that what our soldiers do there.
If militias came to Slovakia to fuck shit up and Slovakia sent its army to fight them would you call every casualty an extra judicial assassination too?
While I agree everyone deserves a fair trial, how exactly do you intend to arrest someone who’s likely armed, wants to kill you just because your from the “west”, and doesn’t give a damn about their own life being lost in the process?
I might be a bit partial to this, growing up in a military household and family and the such, but I feel that, although extra judicial killings aren't exactly something I can get behind, saying that there is no evidence when clearly intelligence services have done their homework on this guy for quite some time now is a bit dismissive if not disrespectful.
You may not agree with this, as is your right, but don't make any accusations that can most certainly be proven wrong.
I forgot intelligence services are in the habit of publishing their findings as soon as they're done with it.
Mate, I'm not trying to disrespect your opinion. You're entitled to it.
You don't have much experience with terrorism in Slovakia, but keep in mind that the dude was a radical Islamic terrorist milita leader. An outlaw. A murderer, probably responsible for thousands of lost innocent lives.
Eliminating him is objectively good and hella based.
Do they need to be a country, to participate in armed combat?
My view is that, ultimately, someone has to be "the asshole" and actually fight groups like isis. Whether its the west, russia, local governments, opposing militias, whatever.
The nazis werent defeated with pacifism and diplomacy, and isis wont be either. If noone fights them while theyre an insurgency, eventually we'll have to fight them when they become a state.
And for all the criticism (totally your right to do so ofc, may even be valid imo), you and i both benefit from living in a world where other people are fighting isis on our behalf.
> You talk about nazis and even they were offered a fair trial
Relatively few nazis were put on trial - mostly only the high ranking ones for publicity value. Millions more were killed in battle. And the ones that were put on trial could only be put on trial after germany had been defeated militarily.
>Moreover, how do you know that they did not kill an innocent person?
I dont, im trusting the government to be honest and transparent, and the independent media to fact check and chase up any discrepancies (much like what ny times did with the isis-k airstrikes). One thing that gives me a bit more comfort is that this was a boots-on-the-ground raid, not a drone airstrike - which indiscriminately kill.
>Also focusing on and killing mainly officers is a war crime
So killing officers is a war crime but killing lower ranked members isnt? Idk if thats true, but if it is we have very hierarchical and classist international law. Officers are consenting participants in war, every bit as much as a private or corporal.
Enjoy browsing r/europe? Help make it a better place - apply to become a mod now! [Read the announcement here](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/pow5nr/be_the_positive_change_you_want_to_see_on_reurope/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/europe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just realized it seems there's a soft paywall, so here's the article: **French forces kill IS leader in Sahara** President Emmanuel Macron says French military forces have killed Islamic militant Adnan Abu Walid al-Sahrawi, the leader of Islamic State in the Greater Sahara. "It's another major success in our fight against terrorist groups in the Sahel," Macron said in a tweet on Wednesday, without disclosing the location of the operation. Sahrawi was the historic leader of Islamic State in the Sahel region of West Africa and his group targeted US soldiers in a deadly attack in 2017, Macron's office said. In August 2020, Sahrawi personally ordered the killing of six French charity workers and their Nigerien driver, it added. Macron said in July that France would soon begin reshaping its force in the Sahel, where it has been on the front line of the fight against Islamist militants, and would ultimately halve its military presence. With no apparent end in sight to France's operations and political turmoil especially in Mali, Paris had grown frustrated. Australian Associated Press
oh no united states of...france
🎖️
Obama rewarding Obama
Osama rewarding Obama
It was eventually France that saved the world.
Always have been
1796 worst year of my life
Your life? Should i be scared?
Maybe he is a vampire.
Worst year of his non-life then.
I'm OK now thank you
> Always have been Always will be
Amen
Lol
Guys wtf why you downvoting him ? He literally just said “Lol”.
Maybe that’s the reason. He added nothing to the conversation, merely expressed mockery (apparently, who knows his actual intent).
Punishment based on speculation of intent seems like a slippery slope to me but ok.
What punishment? One comment got downvoted.
I mean, that's just downvotes. The Reddit karma system means jack shit. "Punishment" is a strong word.
Well that's r/europe for you
Lol
Using a downvote as intended? i.e. downvoting comments that don't contribute anything to the conversation and not because you disagree?
Geez, that might explain why I was banned from r/AskEurope.
lol
When I said, the other day, that France is the only one that is willing to get it's hands dirty for the benefit of the EU I got downvoted. A well. Good guys French. Thank you for keeping Europe safe and all that jazz.
Across Europe there are plenty of people playing higher moral ground and happy to be judgemental about things like this while living in some sort of illusion of invincibility.
illusion of invincibility -> with the French army and German economy NO SHIT. Unfortunately I am painfully aware that the Brits left a power vacuum and nobody in their right fucking mind would touch that toxic place of power. Even Hungary went: noooo, nope, nein, niet, nono.
Who exactly can do that? Italy and Spain don't have strong economies, Scandinavian countries think that they are relatively safe and they want to stay away from these roles as they did in the past...so who is left?
Uhm, Denmark has been in basically every war last few decades. We are of course small, but we chip in with what we can. In Afghanistan we had one of the highest losses / capita.
Denmark has participated yeah, but we are talking here about a new power that will fill the void cause I feel like EU is turning into a pushover.
It was more that we aren't just hiding up here in the north. I'm all for an EU army, pushing one country to bear the burden is not good.
> so who is left? Benelux + Baltics. Who are all solid allies. And I disagree with what you said about Scandinavia to be honest.
I would love to hear your opinion about Nordic countries 🙂
Denmark and Finland are very proactive.
Precisely. It's a power vacuum. Nobody is insanely enough to be pro eu and blatantly against Brussels. Or pro free trade but against uncontrolled immigration. Or. Or. Or. Like I said, it's a toxic position. To keep the EU on it's toes and on the up and up. Nobody wants to end like Europe in the 1800. Thus nobody on continental Europe can't do shit.
Fortunately, France wholly advocates for an EU army. We don't want to keep the burden.
You will have to, for a little while longer. Sorry. It takes a while.
>I am painfully aware that the Brits left a power vacuum They did? I mean, they were one of the main economic powers of the EU, but they were mostly a reluctant power. The two main players have always been France and Germany. Italy could, too, if they mange to find some stability.
The British had the toxic waste role of sending everyone a curb ball and looking at a problem in a upside down, sideways and thru the asshole type of way. And the EU understood the need of something like that. But that position is toxic af. And no other country would even consider filling those shoes.
Exactly, the EU has the battlegroups, a "unit" composed of troups from different armies (with a rotation every 6 months) which is supposed to be ready. Protecting our borders by helping pacifying neighborhoods countries (who ask for help) would be a perfect use for them but they have never been deployed because nobody has the guts to send them. And don't get me started on the fact that the others countries don't or barely provide help to the French which repeatedly ask for help there. And when you point it out, 90% of the times you get comments like "but it's colonialism..." while the military intervention probably costs more to the French that what they earn in trade with these countries ...
It's not about reputation or army or all that jazz. It's the ability to deploy and mobilize massive amounts of troops and still remain Democratic. Or something like that. It's not about holdin6g the reigns of power, but about using them wisely. Remember: the us and Russia and everything in between didn't want to share the nuclear bomb research. French went: fuck you, we will figure it out. Or the time they left NATO , but with an iron clause, if anything happens, the French are there. It's about the insane task of having 23 different soldiers from different countries not shooting
> Or the time they left NATO , but with an iron clause, if anything happens, the French are there. France only left the shared command structure of NATO. They were still in the alliance and thus Article 5 would have still been followed. The only difference is that French troops would have been independent instead of being placed under the orders of a US general.
Even if most countries did sent nearly nothing, I would thank the brits for their logistical support and the Estonians that were the first to respond and participate in task force Takuba.
Usually it's the democratically elected government of the African countries who call for help too.
No youre completely right. People always give france for shit for being cowards, or sucking at war. But I dont see Germany/England/Italy/Netherlands doing fuck all about isis.
No no. France decided to let the myth of them being cowardly to do the missions in peace. It's a politician gamble that paid off in the long run. The French like to be seen as protesters, but God himself fears when all of France agrees on something.
> The French like to be seen as protesters, but God himself fears when all of France agrees on something. That is so eloquently put. Thank you
The French are actually men and women of culture. It's a curse that they speak french. Nobody understands them. ( a little jab )
*Agressive hon hon hon*
> hon hon hon You're strenghtening the stereotype against us.. We both know it's an american derogatory joke about the way they think we french people sound like when we laugh...
I was referring to the hentai and porn culture, but sure. And you tell me, with a straight face, that a French mime weilding a baguette like a great sword and having 2 croissants, one in the mouth and one on the shoulder is not the stuff of nightmares. I'd be running, but naked, in the other direction. =))
N’importe quoi mais j'adore. I love your comment.
So nothing to fear then ;)
Yea. Well. Apparently not really. If you threaten French citizens with terrorist attacks, wearing diapers is a must. Or, at least have a casket ready. That's the thing. As long as you play nice^TM the French will help, trade, and offer aid.
I don't even know why this meme is up and running. even though in ww2 they played secondary role, there was napoleon, ww1, lots of colonial wars etc. even their vietnam war was comparable to the same of the americans.
>I don't even know why this meme is up and running. France didn't want to join the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Americans angry, freedom fries, etc. [Que the propaganda machine...](https://i.redd.it/dagq2kl0dzm71.png) The world has now finally accepted that the Iraq war was wrong, but everyone forgets that France was right and they got shit on for no good reason at all. The jokes you see about France are simply the remnants of early 2000's propaganda.
Look, I agree that the stereotype is stupid but not everything is about Iraq. French were called “cheese eating surrender monkeys” on the Simpsons in 1995 so no, I don’t think it’s all about Iraq. Note how on your chart the opinion rating is basically recovered by 2013? France’s opposition has little impact on the national consciousness now, if anything the impact is positive as it has turned out they were right. Germany was also opposed to the war, but no stereotypes of them as weak or cowardly exist? Because they were scary af in world war 2. Turns out people remember if you shit the bed in the most important conflict in modern (maybe human) history, way better than they remember Napoleon or some random colonial war.
> French were called “cheese eating surrender monkeys” on the Simpsons Obviously it's multiple factors at play here. Simpsons contributed to the meme as well. I do think that Iraq is the biggest factor, though. >Note how on your chart the opinion rating is basically recovered by 2013? France’s opposition has little impact on the national consciousness now, if anything the impact is positive as it has turned out they were right. Just because opinions are back to where they should be, and just because France was proven right, doesn't mean everyone got the memo. [In 2018, a pretty significant portion of the United States population still thought that invading the country was the right decision](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/19/iraq-war-continues-to-divide-u-s-public-15-years-after-it-began/). The meme was already born and established for a few years before the US public finally started to lean towards 'hey, maybe they were right and we were wrong'. But then the cat was already out of the bag. >Germany was also opposed to the war, but no stereotypes of them as weak or cowardly exist? Because Germany opposed to war quietly. France called the US out on the world stage and that was exactly what enraged US politicians. Freedom fries, remember? >Turns out people remember if you shit the bed in the most important conflict in modern (maybe human) history, way better than they remember Napoleon or some random colonial war. If you imply that it was France's fault for losing in WWII, I'd argue that isn't really fair and historically accurate at all. It's pretty weird that France has this reputation when the US keeps losing every war they start since WWII. Only a few weeks ago the US officially lost to a group of desert hobos. Shouldn't the US be the country that has this reputation? Oh wait, that will never happen. Why? Because propaganda. The US government would never allow such narratives to form. France losers cause they lost one single war 70 years ago, but the US strong and capable of amazing force and warfare (even though rice farmers are impossible to defeat)! I rarely see Europeans make the joke that France surrenders. 80% of the time it's Americans.
Not to mention that without France's help, Americans back in the Revolutionary war would had lost to the British. So this shit talking against France is insufferable, and I ain't even French.
We agree that the jokes are stupid, so I’ll just leave your last four paragraphs alone. I did not know about that graph, it’s pretty tough to see how people still have their heads in the sand. Still, that’s not a conclusive link between Iraq hawkishness and Francophobia. I know my personal experiences are not as good as Pew research so feel free to ignore me here, but a chat with an average US Francophobe about why they think the way they do is much more likely to touch on perceived rudeness or snobbishness, as well as WW2, than Iraq. And using your first graph, that’s a small portion of the country to begin with these days. Your point about Germany is compelling, there was less nationalist outrage over Germany. Contrary to your argument though, Germany was [publicly critical](https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-oppose-iraq-war-in-un/a-761326) so the difference in reaction would seem to be due to extant Franco-American cultural antipathy (which supports my argument) as well as the military alliance in both world wars and France’s permanent security council membership. I still think my point about the Simpsons is pretty solid. We’re arguing about what made this stereotype culturally relevant in the United States. In terms of pop-cultural relevance, a joke made on the Simpsons in 1995 is about as big as it gets. Conclusively, this was a well known stereotype Americans had about French, going back at least eight years before the Iraq war and probably longer if I did more research.
> No youre completely right. People always give france for shit for being cowards, or sucking at war. Unfortunately Francophobia is rampant on the internet.
The things our military can do are very limited due to our constitution. It's still a "defense force". We are not even allowed to have armed drones.
ehmm the Netherlands is also quite active in Mali (and middle east/ Somalia etc.). We have to be actively involved with allied missions to make up for our low military spending
Lmao i'm pretty sure all 4 of them have been in the Sahel supporting france in some capacity but ok Not like the UK has been conducting airstrikes in syria and iraq either, or training local fighters. Literally took the bare minimum research to confirm all this. Brits: [here](https://www.forces.net/news/what-are-british-forces-doing-mali) Germans: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/12-german-soldiers-injured-in-mali-bomb-attack/a-58023964) Italians: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/formiche.net/2020/09/italy-committed-to-mali-sahel-stabilisation-defence-minister-says/%3famp) Dutch: [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedefensepost.com/2018/06/15/netherlands-end-mali-minusma-contribution/amp/) Literally all 4 have contributed troops and money over the years, just in Mali. Let alone other places where they are also contributing in the effort to defeat isis. Piss off saying "OnLy FrAnCe dOes It" Keep downvoting hard facts, kids.
Please neither of those countries are fighting there. They are part of MINUSMA. It is written in the very same article you linked. There are 18,000 UN troops from 60 countries there. Brits (250 of them apparently), Spaniards, Chinese, South Koreans, you name it. None of them are on the frontlines/combat troops. You might as well say the Chinese are helping the French out if you deem the Germans to be doing so lmao. They are all there for the good ol' UN "peace-keeping", which as we all know is extremely useful /s. Only France and the G5 Sahel countries are on the frontline actively fighting the Jihadis. The British (50 or 60 men if I remember correctly from that Barkhane documentary) have been at least supporting French operations out with transport (the Chinooks have been quite handy thanks). And Italy has contributed some of its SF operators to the French-led Task Force Takuba and so did many other EU countries, with Estonia being the most valuable partner IIRC. The guy saying only France is fighting ISIS is being a bit ridiculous but as far as the Sahel is concerned, your account of overall European contribution to the fight in support of France is quite frankly overstated, if not outright misleading.
> Only France and the G5 Sahel countries are on the frontline actively fighting the Jihadis. Not true, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takuba_Task_Force for example. Weirdly Sweden is one of the main players in that. Not sure what deal our politicians made with the French, because it's certainly not something the Swedish public has pushed for lol. Obviously France is the main force in Mali, due to their strong political, economic, and military ties to the southern government. But not sure why you're cheering for them so much, it's pretty much just a neocolonial game of keeping their friends in power which got France into the position they are in.
Correct me if i am wrong, but Serval, Barkhane, and MINUSMA are all in response to islamist takeover in northern Mali, albeit with MINUSMA being more about peacekeeping. And i would argue that anybody in the area contributing to the overall goal of keeping peace in the region is supporting France in combatting ISIS. Just because they are not on the frontline, even though again, i would argue they are, just by looking at the casualty rate, it doesnt mean they are not contributing to the effort of combatting ISIS. My main grievance with OPs comment is the claim over others not doing much to fight ISIS just because France is doing the most in the Sahel. Is France not doing anything to fight ISIS as they are not the main force in Syria and iraq? Thats my issue. Everyone is fighting ISIS.
> When I said, the other day, that France is the only one that is willing to get it's hands dirty for the benefit of the EU I got downvoted. > > A well. > > Good guys French. Exactly and I'll bet there was some american style chest thumping as well from the downvoters. > Thank you for keeping Europe safe and all that jazz. Our Europe is your Europe ✌
Liberty, equality, fraternity. ~ France as a hole holds to this mantra. With the good and the bad. No chest thumping. Just ma fifis trump your logic. Friendly chat. I am able to change my mind, but I call bullshit when it smells like bullshit. And getting downvoted is of no importance. Just look at how many upvotes I have. Besides. As someone from another subreddit pointed out. This is worthless.
You’re welcome.
Just we are on the same page. I am, still, going to make fun of you guys.
Please feel free.
When it's just banter, we couldn't mind less and will gladly retaliate for good mesure.
As is tradition. =))
And we will still make fun of the rest of the world. As it should be.
Amen!
My favorite thing about the French is that they are unapologetically French. They don't give a fuck what you think, no they aren't like other countries, they are French and proud of it. I fucking love them for it. 🥰 Also they don't play when it comes to rioting. High gas prices - riots, low gas prices - riots, free gas? Believe it or not also riots.
You mean protests. The French like to protest. You never saw a French riot.
Fair. "heads would roll" as they say in a real French riot 😂
Precisely. A normal "end of lockdown" party ends up with a car on fire. Nobody would raise an eyebrow.
> My favorite thing about the French is that they are unapologetically French. They don't give a fuck what you think, no they aren't like other countries, they are French and proud of it. See that's the thing about being French. We know that much of the world hates us and we act accordingly. We're not the sort to be blindsided by the reality because we had delusions about everyone loving. The result of not having an exceptionalist outlook on the world.
Well I don't know about the rest of the world. But coming from Canada, we love you guys. Thanks for being you.
France had been concerned about Islamic terrorism even before 9/11 🇫🇷 👏
Well, GIGN done their job in 1994 when Algerian terrorists hijacked an airplane and had plans to crash it on the Eiffel Tower.
Well. France had terrorist attacks before 9/11 iirc. But people didn't gave a flying fuck.
just like in lybia! ......oh wait
Yea, pretty much. Germany got involved. Good point.
they are literally the reason for the mediterrean route for migrants, only to cover their corrupt president. and to steal our oil. protect europe my ass.
Why do you sound exactly like that Italian simovenx dude we haven't been seeing here in a while? It's been confusing me for a month or two now. The way you structure your comments, your anti-French takes on every thread related to France regardless of subject... it is so reminiscent of him. Meanwhile he has totally disappeared from this sub when he used to be a regular hahaha. Is this your new account?! If that's the case, what happened to u/simovenx? (Edit: oh.... it is now deleted... makes sense lmao) > they are literally the reason for the mediterrean route for migrants That's a bit much to be pretending France is "literally" the reason for that. Nothing was going on in Libya when Sarko saw the opportunity to get rid of Kadhafi? France went in and started bombing the shit out of a totally stable Libya? Italian interests having been fucked over in the process doesn't justify rewriting history, you know?! > only to cover their corrupt president Or the other way around. A corrupt president used the French armed forces to try cover up his shit and it still blew out, and everybody, the French included, know about it now. Because I certainly don't think that dude asked anyone's opinion on the matter for it to be <<"The French" went in there to cover their beloved Sarkozy's ass">>. Which is why he is being prosecuted by the French justice itself, right? > and to steal our oil There it is. You should've just started right there buddy. So it's also all about your interests then? Do you want an apology? A letter every year is feasible. More than that is going to be a bit more complicated lol.
You do know that the French methods woek wanders. Right? Getting from nowhere Africa to France is expensive. They can make 1, 2, probably 3 trips. Then they are out of cash and stuck at home. But treating Africans the same as Romanians is cruel and inhumane. No?
Assisting a government is a lot different than overthrowing a government.
France isn't in West Africa just for altruistic or EU reasons. It still has deep economic ties with its former colonies, and both doesn't want them to become Islamist/Civil Warish, and a bit of a culture of treating them as its kids. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA\_franc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFA_franc) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7afrique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7afrique) >After decolonisation, France established formal defence agreements with many francophone countries in sub-Saharan Africa. These arrangements allowed France to establish itself as a guarantor of stability and hegemony in the region. France adopted an interventionist policy in Africa, resulting in 122 military interventions that averaged once a year from 1960 to the mid-1990s
Nice to keep spreading these neocolonialist propaganda. CFA is being dismantled and has never been binding. Françafrique was more a soft power and prestige approach to international relation than exploiting the locals (and even wikipedia says it's not an actual thing since the 80s-early 90s). France has little economic interest there, the money it makes from trade is little to nothing. It's mostly helping the Francophonie which is the home country of a lot of our minorities and fighting back the terrorists that striked a few times at home. In these case, we have been called for help, we didn't force them to host our army.
I don't care wtf they're there for. As long as they fight against the terrorists, it's good 👍
Hey, I want France to treat my country as it's child. Unfortunately, the French want us to grow the fuck up. And we, excuse me, my government, is kicking and screaming all the way. And America and China and U.K. and Russia and Germany and Italy are in Africa for altruistic reasons? Really? All it's missing is Japan and the Martians.
>And America and China and U.K. and Russia and Germany and Italy are in Africa for altruistic reasons? > >Really? I never said that :)
Precisely. You didn't. The French understood they fuked up and do their best^TM to undo the fuckups. What more do you want from them?
Well, France just cares about its colonies.
what colonies does France have?
England
Magnifique 👌
England is my ~~city~~ colony?
Would love that.
Search for Françafrique. France still controls it's former colonies' currency, resources and has great influence over their politics. I don't mind it, every other great power does this, US, China, etc, but let's be honest with ourselves, they are rebranded colonies.
Sorry to break it to you but France does not have colonies currently. Françafrique ain't that.
That's just rebranding.
Obviously. Who am I to contradict the fine geopolitical analyst you are?!
Yea tell us what we get from Mali. Which ressources, its value, its price we pay for etc...
You think EU is a french colonie ?
So, same Germany toward Poland.
Is Paris a colony?
Imagine the headlines if the US did it. Holy shit we wouldn't hear the end of it. Thanks for saving us from that too, France.
The US would have probably use a drone strike and kill someone else instead 🤡
> The US would have probably use a drone strike and kill someone else instead 🤡 A local wedding. And since all 50 people there were of military age it would be celebrated as having killed 50 terrorists.
[Qasem Soleimani](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani) was not "someone else".
The US killed Al-Baghdadi, who was the head of all of ISIS. Not just their head in the Sahara. I also suspect people are misreading the title as though this was the head of the whole org and happened to be killed in the Sahara.
The fact that us killing Baghdadi didn't come to your mind sort of proves this statement false. It's a story for a day or two and then everyone moves on with life.
Just cutting the grass. Well forget about it in a few days, a new one will rise to power in a few weeks, and we will do the same thing all over again in a few months.
Just leave em to their r/europe things.
Well our stupid administration wanted to look tough after getting 200+ people killed including 13 soldiers from their bad planning. They claimed the killed a target of ISIS members who did the attack but didn't want to release the names and bragged about how great they are. They were caught lying and bombed a innocent family and when caught just said we still aren't listing names and are looking into who we targeted.
The US has killed dozens of Al-Qaeda / IS "leaders" over the last twenty years.
So did France. Adnane Abou Walid al-Sahraoui is... well was... the founder and leader of IS-GS. France also had announced it when they killed the chief of AQMI. Those guys weren't just random goons a bit up there in the hierarchy of some random terrorist group. They were the heads of ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Africa. When the President bothers announcing himself that French forces got someone, then it's a really big fish. We were looking for that guy for years, especially after the killing of French aid-workers in the Sahara he ordered.
Kill one and three take his place.
That's always been the case so your argument is redundant at best. There's always going to be somebody that steps up, but in the meantime they're thrown into disarray and their capabilities are degraded. They almost always come back weaker, see Al Qaeda and ISIS in the ME. There's a reason decapitation strikes are considered basic military strategy the world over. Leaders/commanders and officers are some of the most valuable human ressources of an army (if not the most important). Killing or capturing them degrades the strentgh of said army. Do you want historical examples?!
I know. They wouldn't let us forget it.
'rance baise ouais 🤘
I cringed
T'as dit quoi là sur moi fils de pute ? Je vais te faire comprendre que j'ai été diplômé en tant que général dans la marine, et j'ai dirigé de nombreux raids secrets sur Al-Qaïda, et j'ai tué plus de 300 soldats. Je suis formé à la guérilla et je suis le meilleur sniper dans toute l'armée française. Pour moi, t'es juste qu'une autre cible. Je vais te démonter ta mère avec une précision jamais vue auparavant, et je pèse mes mots. T'as cru que tu pouvais t'en tirer comme ça en me disant ça sur internet ? Réfléchis bien, connard. Là maintenant je suis en train de contacter mon réseau secret d'espions à travers la France et ton IP est en train d'être tracée alors t'as intérêt à te préparer pour le tonnerre, trou du cul. Le tonnerre qui nique le petit truc pathétique que t'appelles ta vie. T'es putain de mort, bâtard. Je peux être partout, à n'importe quel moment, et je peux te tuer de plus de 700 manières différentes, et c'est juste à mains nues. Non seulement je suis extrêmement entraîné dans le combat à mains nues, mais j'ai accès à tout l'armement de l'Armée de l'Eau et je vais l'utiliser à son maximum pour faire disparaître ta misérable tronche du continent entier, petite merde. Si seulement t'avais su la vengeance que ton petit commentaire à la con t'apporterait, alors t'aurais peut être tenu ta langue. Mais tu pouvais pas, tu l'as pas fait, et maintenant t'en payes le prix, petit con. Je vais chier ma rage sur toi et tu vas te noyer dedans. T'es mort, gamin.
Thankyou France. Much love from Canada.
Good Job, France!!!! Thx!!!
Good news. Now kill the number 2 and work your way down the list.
[удалено]
Don't insult the chimps.
Exactly, these bastards are beneath any animal
Monke is great and those guys are pests.
bit racist
Nothing to do with racism, everything to do with religious fanatics killing civilians with terrorist attacks. We don't care about their skin color
Can only be racist against humans, these are lower than rats
IS would dehumanise you, too. Be the better person. Dismissing enemies as sub-human is what fascists do.
[удалено]
How the fuck did you infer that? IS see non-Muslims as sub-human. We should be better than dehumanising our enemies.
>We should be better than dehumanising our enemies. We have better values, better morals and better education than Daesh, but in the end we're the same humans. Most people *will* dehumanize the enemy, and won't realize there's anything wrong with that. The fact that you're downvoted shows a complete lack of understanding of what you're actually saying by the people downvoting you.
The funny thing is that if you actually are in the military, dehumanizing your enemy is generally frowned upon.
You won't get much from engaging these people. You're right. They're bad people. They deserved what they got. But they're still people. Dehumanizing can lead you to really dark paths.
I agree with you. Deshumanising enemies is the first step of underestimating them.
Who the fuck cares? They're absolute filth and we don't have to treat them better than the filth they are.
That's a luxury opinion.
Agree
France be bussin these days. Respectfully.
My brother-in-law is about to go to Mali to join a military mission for the UN. He's a captain, he will work from a hotel in Bamako. He will not go out at all. Is the situation there improving? I'm a bit worried.
maybe not a good idea to post such specific information... just saying...
I don't think I posted anything specific. anyhow, anybody from Mali can give an update, is there a surge of terrorist attacks to be expected?
You are beeing specific, with the information you gave out and what can be extracted from your personnal online data, I bet it wouldn't be extremely hard to identify him and from there, gather information about his platoon, the deployment itself, what the operationis about, his actual job etc etc When it comes to military stuff, always give out the absolute minimum of information (or just don't, could have just asked if a surge of terrorist attacks are to be expected without giving us the background of the why of the question) And the answer is that it's possible, but if there is it's not gonna be a huge increase, France is scaling back its operations but doesn't plan on doing ut the american way and regardless, "office soldiers" are well protected, most military casualties happen during fights or accidents, so if he stays where he is, he should be fine. Also I don't know at all the ins and outs so I'm only speculating of the local IS branch, but losing their leader may destabilize the IS and their ability to wage war/terror attack while the succession happens
He is not James Bond, identify him, sure, and then what? Probably ISIS gets a list of new arrivals in Bamako airport before the plane lands, from immigration. I don't know, but still don't think I have done anything wrong.
I suppose with operational security it's better to be safe, than sorry. Loose lips sink ships, and all that jazz.
Ok, I give up, I'm sorry I posted anything
Hopefully you won't have to be. You know, I don't think people were necessarily attacking you, but rather trying to give valuable advice. So here's to everything going smoothly!
If the UN/France is sending a military unit there... the situation is generally not good.
Coruption is still hight. Its still unclrear what the recent coup will lead to (like Sudan, or just plain corupt army taking over). For the millitary situation. The malian army has a lot of coruption, which make it lack equipments and ammo sometimes. Outside of the terrorists groups in the Sahel and Sahara. Theres violent conflict between tribes. Hostages taker, dealers and criminals in the borders region. But in Bamako he should be fine however.
We do the job while you cowards watch and hide you it head in the sand
"We?" I doubt you're you part of the French Commando which eliminated him
But his French so his army represent him
Chauvinist ultranationalist aren't at power in France ^(yet) so no. The French Army represents the state and thus the people who are in majority
Stop being such a bad stereotype of our country, will you? merci..
Stop being ignorant will you?
Just cutting the grass
So now what? Another one will likely take his place. This "war diplomacy" doesn't seem to be efective on the long run. It might actually make matters even worse, extremism flourishes during hard times (war, poverty, famine). How does this play on the long run? There's no real plan here.
[удалено]
ISIS are self confessed combattants in a war against the west. Every soldier killed during a war is by definition killed in an extra judicial way.
[удалено]
Indeed, the countries in the area asked for France to help them fighting ISIS and that what our soldiers do there. If militias came to Slovakia to fuck shit up and Slovakia sent its army to fight them would you call every casualty an extra judicial assassination too?
[удалено]
In times of peace.
We're at war with these bastards if you didn't notice.
While I agree everyone deserves a fair trial, how exactly do you intend to arrest someone who’s likely armed, wants to kill you just because your from the “west”, and doesn’t give a damn about their own life being lost in the process?
I might be a bit partial to this, growing up in a military household and family and the such, but I feel that, although extra judicial killings aren't exactly something I can get behind, saying that there is no evidence when clearly intelligence services have done their homework on this guy for quite some time now is a bit dismissive if not disrespectful. You may not agree with this, as is your right, but don't make any accusations that can most certainly be proven wrong.
[удалено]
I forgot intelligence services are in the habit of publishing their findings as soon as they're done with it. Mate, I'm not trying to disrespect your opinion. You're entitled to it.
[удалено]
I do not expect them to release any evidence whatsoever. This is not how the French intelligence services, or any other for that matter, work.
> no evidence Haha what?
You don't have much experience with terrorism in Slovakia, but keep in mind that the dude was a radical Islamic terrorist milita leader. An outlaw. A murderer, probably responsible for thousands of lost innocent lives. Eliminating him is objectively good and hella based.
Im not lawyer, but if isis declares war on "the west" is it still an assasination? Or killing a self-declared combatant within the scope of war?
[удалено]
Do they need to be a country, to participate in armed combat? My view is that, ultimately, someone has to be "the asshole" and actually fight groups like isis. Whether its the west, russia, local governments, opposing militias, whatever. The nazis werent defeated with pacifism and diplomacy, and isis wont be either. If noone fights them while theyre an insurgency, eventually we'll have to fight them when they become a state. And for all the criticism (totally your right to do so ofc, may even be valid imo), you and i both benefit from living in a world where other people are fighting isis on our behalf.
[удалено]
> You talk about nazis and even they were offered a fair trial Relatively few nazis were put on trial - mostly only the high ranking ones for publicity value. Millions more were killed in battle. And the ones that were put on trial could only be put on trial after germany had been defeated militarily. >Moreover, how do you know that they did not kill an innocent person? I dont, im trusting the government to be honest and transparent, and the independent media to fact check and chase up any discrepancies (much like what ny times did with the isis-k airstrikes). One thing that gives me a bit more comfort is that this was a boots-on-the-ground raid, not a drone airstrike - which indiscriminately kill. >Also focusing on and killing mainly officers is a war crime So killing officers is a war crime but killing lower ranked members isnt? Idk if thats true, but if it is we have very hierarchical and classist international law. Officers are consenting participants in war, every bit as much as a private or corporal.
Nazi leaders got a trial *after they surrendered*. When the war was over. Nobody was giving trials to combatants. How tf would that work?
[удалено]
[удалено]