So we've seen muslims attack a nightclub, a marathon, a theatre, and now a fireworks show...

...

That url at the bottom of the pic is the funniest part. Like a good punchline.

==lf were forbidden to direct a truck in France, shouldn't never happened the attack of nice.
So we must #banassalttrucks #banalltrucks NOW==

Taking down critical infrastructure (electricity, POL, water supply, sewage systems, transportation, among others) has been extensively studied by both the intelligence community (see the DIA 1993 report entitled "Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities") and the military (see the various US air force theorists out, e.g. Felker's "Airpower, Chaos and Infrastructure: Lords of the Rings" paper). There is evidence to suggest that Islamic militants not only were explicitly trained in these (especially at the end of the Cold War by the West), but also learned how this works from seeing Americans carry out infrastructural warfare during the Iraq conflict (see John Robb's blog and book)

One of the major consequences of critical infrastructure attacks from all of the above is that it switches cities off. This has higher order effects. Switching infrastructure off has higher order effects, e.g. no refrigeration, no access to bank accounts, hospital equipment not working, among others. This in turn has other higher order effects spinning off these, e.g. reliance on batteries or fuels for generators, rising disease rates, malnutrition, increased complexity of logistics and war fighting (fighting at night without batteries for night-fighting equipment).

All this means that the strategic effects are the following: it demodernizes the target area and allows for pre-modern forms of government to arise, i.e. warlords, chieftains, religious cults, tribes. Basically Mad Max. Or Iraq. See Graham's book Disrupted Cities: When Infrastructure Fails for an extensive data-driven analysis of this. These are all the things that would pay off majorly for islamic extremists if they pulled off the attacks. Rather than rely on local western government, the people would turn to local islamists with their da'wah activity and community outreach. Given the secularization in the west (and the brainwashing of muh religion of peace), this would have added effects as the populace turn to Islam in an environment where the critical infrastructure is smashed and they need protection in the form of a local Hobbesian leviathan.

Nevertheless, for critical infrastructure attacks to work in the long term you need an associated shadow government and political infrastructure in the target area, e.g. security system, fiscal system, health system, among a whole bunch of other areas. You need to offer an out. This is why groups like Hezbollah excel in these areas. They don't just have warfighting capabilities, they have the ability to rebuild and mold the local population with "good will."

Muslims do not have this in the west yet. They have certain no-go zones, but they don't have the long-term localized and widespread political infrastructure to capitalize on taking down the grid. I would say this is why you have not seen a widespread infrastructure attack yet. With demographic trends (and Gulf State money), you might expect one sometime by 2050. Probably before.

They would if the fall guys all managed to kill themselves, get shot in the process, or blown up by a robot.

that entire post was sarcasm. of course they would.

Setting the long term aside, if they were to disable any major sewage or water treatment plant in the country, blow up a bridge, or cut power to a large area it would cost lives and a fuckton of money. A lot of it would be easy to do. It'd be more effective than a random nightclub.

Welcome newfriend.

pick -3

Depends what you mean by effective. Again, I think they are well aware of what the effects are. Hence the amount of research on the West's side, and the large amount of literature on what they think about it.

At a strategic level there is no real effect from single acts. All a single infrastructural attack does is make their enemy (the west) learn from the experience either at a technical level (make better robust infrastructure) or at other levels (penetrating and capturing the cell or individual that carried it out, crack down on security). At a comparative level to nightclub shootings, sure, it kills people, it strikes terror, it has financial repurcussions, but its actual empirical effects have to do with the literature I've mentioned above (the higher order compounding effects of infrastructural attacks is what really disrupts and topples the target society). They can continue buzzing about like annoying bees, stinging us from time to time, or they can play the long game and take down the entire lion.

I think they've made a conscious decision at the operational level not to do it until they've got the accompanying political infrastructure/shadow governments in place. They've seen what happens when you do it over a long time at multiple targets. They've just spent the last 15 years experimenting at it. An infrastructural attack at this point would blow their wad too early.

Same reason they don't attack politicians or people who matter. They are dumb.

I imagine even a shitty explosive in a mall or Best Buy during Black Friday would kill hundreds…

Who knows, hopefully Kek doesn't bless this post.

Because the government would never want to seriously hurt itself.

An organizations heads are never dumb, I'm sure many people would claim that our politicians are, due to a lack of better understanding what they are exactly doing but they are not, the governments in the modern world simply put themselves and their bureaucracies above the interests of the people and each and every step they take is done so to bring as much monetary or other benefit as possible to them and (((them))).
If an organization was headed by actually stupid people it would not last for long.

The heads of most terrorist organizations are Israelis, so I guess they are not exactly dumb. The people under them are dumb, however.

They're not trying to militarily defeat the West. As you can read in "The Management of Savagery", it's about "eliminating the grey zone" in which Muslims in the West find themselves.

It's a classic insurgent tactic that has been used by Communists: you have an ambivalent minority which you want to get over to your side. You provoke the government into cracking down, thus driving the members of the minority to your side.

The (unrealistic) idea of ISIS is that Western governments will make life impossible for Muslims living in Europe, thus forcing them to emigrate to ISIS territory and lead their caliphate to victory with the renewed manpower.

Interrupting the bread and circuses is a great way to piss people off and make them start caring about what's going on, and their handlers are aware of this. Nobody cares until it affects their daily life.

Because they want them in working order when they take over.

Which is never going to happen.

The goal of Terrorism is to spread everyday terror to the common people.
Attacking a power plant would be concieved as a much lesser threat, because it can't happen to everyone at any time.

Also, an attack on a power plant by muslims would probably be covered up as an "accident"

Because they aren't fighting a war, dildo, they're doing terrorism. Blowing up bridges isn't as scary

Better question
Why haven't they attacked any Synagogues?

That's a pretty good question…
Could be that they know they won't get any real retaliation so long as they kill the gentile and avoid harming the one who holds the gentile's leash.

They have.

There was the Kosher market where a muzzie took hostages, and that synagogue/school where 4 people were shot.

links?

Yeah, or they're being directed not to. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, you know. Or maybe most people would just laugh bc deep down nobody really likes Jews anyway?

You missed the two airports. Belgium and Turkey.

Because that involves risk. Its the same reason they don't attack gun clubs, military bases, or even MMA gyms. That is the subversive beauty of this. Those most likely to die in their attacks are either libcucks or general citizens who don't give a shit. They kill those who consent to their presence, which in turn sends people flocking to us.

If there is a worse plan than this, I'd like to hear it.

Eh, or the Jews are a bit more cautious about this. Being a "persecuted race" they are allowed the luxury and freedom to absolutely oust and remove anybody from their "communities" they think might cause them harm.
And likewise they will stay away from areas where such problem people would be.

Honestly, the ones that keep rallying so hard for this #notallmuslims type of shit are cucked christians and some super cucked atheists. The last one is a disappointment, really. But it shows that there may be some deeper need for dogma, even if a belief in a god isn't present.

Nobody gives a fuck about turkey
they are sandniggers let them all die too

I've been awake the whole night and now you want me to Google this shit… fine.

The hostage-situation developer shortly after Charlie Hebdo and resulted in some deaths.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porte_de_Vincennes_siege

The other shooting happened in 2012 and resulted in 4 people (4 young children and a rabbi) being shot at a Jewish school.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toulouse_and_Montauban_shootings

There was also a non-lethal riot in 2014 during which Arabs chanted "Death to the Jews!" as they trapped people inside a synagogue.
timesofisrael.com/clashes-in-paris-as-thousands-march-against-israel-offensive/

Proposing that Muslims avoid attacking Jewish establishments would require you to make the preposterous assumption that these sandnigger savages can be controlled in any way. Some Jews might think of them as allies (moreso in the past than now), but the average Muslim does hate Jews, no question about that.

uh…

It wouldn't be that hard. The Orlando shooter drove like 160 miles to get to that club. Keeping people out of the community or whatever doesn't really have anything to do with it imho. I mean, it might create some barrier, but its easily surmountable

What purpose does striking terror even serve if they're trying to quietly infiltrate communities as peaceful not-invaders?

Newfag here, why aren't they attacking jewish temples? Aren't jews the one occupying palestine? Hmmmm…

How many more *)Muslim(* attacks is Europe going to have to experience before they decide that enough is enough? Tolerating and accommodating these barbarians is wrong on multiple levels, and they add nothing positive to their host countries.

Didn't they set the Eiffel State Tower on fire?

Where will the tourists go!? It will be chaos!

People have to lose their jobs and become NEETs in great numbers or at least have very little stability and only temporary jobs and then they will no longer be so busy trying to make money and stay in a bubble and they will be exposed to shit and get really upset. Adolf Hitler himself was homeless for a time.

Some Eastern European countries are already rejecting it on a national level.

As for France, I can't see how NF won't win the next election.

who do you think is funding ISIS?

jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Syrian-army-reportedly-seizes-Israeli-made-weapons-on-their-way-to-ISIS-452497
archive.is/O2pZR

Also when western nations talk about arming "moderate rebels", there is literally no way of determining if they are ISIS affiliated or not, as half the rebel groups the US is aiming at supplying are Islamist too. This is why you see ISIS running around with German, French, and American weaponry.

They can't kill the people who fund them, user.

They attack what their books tell them to attack, not what is strategically best or anything. On average they're not very intelligent either, so don't expect them to pull off any impressive acts. What you can expect: they subjugation and killing of kafirs, done in barbaric and primitive fashion, of course.

clearly you're a newfag bc rule #1 is READ THE THREAD

see

How horrifying. Imagine if even a small infrastructure attack happened in a city full of melanin-enriched individuals.

It would be like Hurricane Katrina combined with the L.A Riots, combined with the Zimmerman riots.

...

When I say Europe I mean basically all of Europe except the Eastern part.

meanwhile they're going into clubs and murdering faggot spics. you've just proven my point. ever heard, "the exception proves the rule"?

absolutely they can. do you not think they are taking orders from Imams and whatnot? The question is why haven't the Imams said "hit every fucking Synagogue in the West and keeping hitting them and killing Jews until US policy changes" or whatever.

I don't know, my area has lots of jews. Synagogues, some sort of jew-school thing.
The Jew-school is walled up and gated in with cameras and security stations.
Every synagogue i've passed has someone sitting out there, guarding it (in a car though, lol lazy) and they don't seem to leave until the last people in the building leave.

They actually happen all the time in Iraq, Syria, Sudan… You just don't hear about them in the media because hey, who cares about muslim lives, right?

The first two I'll grant you… but…

It's not politically beneficial for western media to cover the daily attacks in Muslim countries, so they generally don't.

Well, recent polls showed that 62% of France wants out of the EU and National Front were (don't know if they still are) twice as popular as their closest competition.

Germany has the highest percentage of people who consider themselves "far right", but they're still a hilariously small minority.

Britain, now that Theresa May is taking over, will stay cucked for a very long time, even if the Brexit actually happens.

Italy and Spain still don't give much of a shit overall.

lol, really? haha. Crafty bastids, those hebes. I have noticed Jews don't tend to go out much (except at night when they secretly steal christian babies) and keep very quiet. At one level I almost feel sorry for them; it must be frightening growing up as a Jew. It must be frightening knowing the depth of depravity and evil that exists in the world, and knowing your people are the largest part of it, and always fearing that the goyim know and are going to be fed up with it soon.

they must be nervous wrecks

My point still stands, though. Bash Islam all you want but Syrians (including white yazidis), Iraqis and many Africans suffer as much if not more from terrorism than we do.

You answered your own question OP

All smart sandniggers are working their ass off to get the next nobel prize. So the mudslime terrorists have to rely on the stupid sandniggers left who are not working as a astronaut, nuclear physicist or doctor. Also what said.

don't forget Indonesia and the Philippines

It's clear that attacks cause a rift between western societies and Muslims. When the Boston bombings occurred, several mosques were either closed or literally barricaded themselves from media and social exposure.

If I were to theorize, this serves as a means to make overseas Muslim communities to become insular and isolated from western influence. These then become secure grounds for recruiters to work from.

aired March 4th, 2001

Sandniggers aren't that smart dude, though many of them are redpilled on Jews.

I'm part sandnigger, and am well aware of their shortcoming though I myself have a high IQ. My sandnigger family knows all about the Juden, and sandniggers in Europe have been attacking Jews all the time which is why they have been moving to Israel in record numbers.

As for why their hasn't been a large scale terrorist attack, I don't see the point. Terrorists want to punish the gentiles for their support for Israel. If it weren't for gentile white being in their lands and supporting Israel we wouldn't be having major conflict. Note I am not apologizing for Islam in any way or sandniggers. They are largely inbred barbarians with a barbaric religion, but when it comes to their hatred for us they have legitimate grievances. It is the fault of white gentiles for allowing themselves to be slaves to the Jew.

That makes sense. Do you know any works that outline this method?

I've read summaries of Management of Savagery, which was apparently a major reference for Al Qaeda's strategy similar to what Dugin is to Russia, in which it describes provoking the US/NATO to invade muslim countries to radicalize their populations, as well as demonstrate their weakness under guerilla warfare and attrition tactics.

But "peaceful" immigiration into western countries is a new development, and terrorism following it seems to be counterintuitive - but your theory seems right and follows the same principle.

Because that would cause the Jews to flee. If they want the jews dead and not just gone, its better to occupy their surroundings and strike afterwards.

If you want a non conspiritorial answer anyways

I fucking love these. this one is not as good as the Sex vs Deus Vult, but still pretty good

It was a rhetorical question

Fantastic post.

Simply pointing out their stupidity is a mistake. The people running the show aren't idiots. Even if the puppet-in-command is a genuine shitskin, every population has its share of high performers.

i.e., BLM isn't run or funded by idiots, you can't discount their top level planning capabilities - it's only their foot soldiers and independent sects that are nothing but angry chimps. Locally independent or stand alone complex style happenings (pulse, etc.) will have limited to no engagement with high command and show signs of retard planning, but not the long game.

Actually I'm missing that one if anyone has it

This is why my waifu is a shipgirl.

oh, that's good. keks

Indonesia has pogroms against the christian minority, regular church burnings, and occasional lynchings.

A number of reasons, but mainly these four: they're relatively well-guarded, they're relatively difficult to destroy (do you have any idea how much explosives it takes to destroy a dam?), there are extensive contingency plans for attacks on infrastructure and the main objective of terrorist attacks is to cause terror - almost a hundred people being mown down in public on a national holiday tends to stick in the public memory much better than "that time a snackbar snackbar'd a power plant and the lights went off for a few hours".

Nice post, milfag. I'm impressed.

same tbh

Because terrorism isnt real.

Everyone knows 9/11 was workplace violence. White collar workers from WTC and the Pentagon flew planes into their workplaces after having disagreements with their bosses.

A better translation would be "the exception tests the rule". "Prove" here means "test", not "demonstrate".

I don't know whether it's Imams specifically, but sure. It's entirely possible that some higher-ups are taking orders from the Mossad.

I'm only making the modest claim that the low-level guys don't have any interest in protecting the Jews.

The point of Brexit wasn't really to save the Brits, but to save the continent. Britain was an extremely lefty voice in the EU for one, and its departure has sent the Euros into panic, which will cause them to overplay their hand and hasten the disintegration of the EU.

Why infrastructure attacks don't happen:

-More difficult to plan and get supplies. Infrastructure is difficult to blow up. Speaking as an engineer, blowing up a truck full of gunpowder on top of a bridge will not make the bridge collapse since most of the force of the explosion is directed upwards anyway. You need special explosives put into strategic locations to do major infrastructure damage, so this will never happen because most idiotic Muslims don't know these locations and will get caught in 2 seconds trying something like that. The government is up their ass already as far as getting any real explosives goes, so trying to buy enough of anything to collapse a bridge will put you in Guantanamo long before you get your hands on it.

-High Risk Scenario. Lets say that Muslims managed to blow up the Hoover Dam somehow and kill thousands of people as well as cost billions in damage. Do you think that regular people are just going to tolerate Muslims? Especially after 9/11? Mosques are going to be set on fire, Muslims publicly beaten or killed in the streets and there will be a massive increase in hate for Muslims overall. It will be counterproductive if all Muslims get deported or put into camps, or the country responsible gets nuked, because of a terrorist attack that did too much damage.

-Lack of Network. I guess this sort of ties into my first point, but you need a solid network to get supplies and logistics for any of these types of attacks, which is next to impossible because our government actually does a pretty good job at infiltrating their networks and interrupting this. This makes it very difficult to do anything besides shooting up a building or creating a shitty home made bomb. Any decently sized network is going to get pozzed in weeks so Muslims are wary about who they can even talk to about terrorist shit.

Why Muslims don't attack synagogues: Speaking as someone who lives in a fairly Jewish area in Brooklyn, is Ashkenazi himself and who has actually been to a lot of synagogues, I'll tell you that they are pretty good with security and will immediately spot a Muslim. Major Jewish areas like Crown Heights and Borough Park have Shomrim (basically unofficial Jewish police) who will follow any Muslim they spot in the neighborhood, confront them and possibly beat the shit out of them. There was a case a few years back where some nigger came into Crown Heights, probably not up to anything but still acting suspiciously, and the Shomrim beat him so badly that he ended up paralyzed. The point is, these people are paranoid as fuck and will spot an outsider very quickly. There is no way that a Muslim will enter a crowded synagogue without being confronted at the door and questioned.

making my list
checking it twice
gonna remove the —muslims— in nice
kebab remover is coming to town

...

Fuck off, Schlomo Syrianstein

You could, in theory, be able to blow up something like the Hoover Dam because it is an arch dam, so it is a lot taller and thinner than a traditional gravity dam. It would require a fuckton of explosives in strategic locations at the weakest points of the arch, so somewhere near the outside base at the center (would weaken the center of the arch and let the water pressure do the rest). However, this would be logistically impossible since it would take days to set up something like that, it would be extremely conspicuous and the dam is well guarded.

Gravity dams on the other hand, like Three Gorges or Itiapu are so large and thick that they can withstand multiple nukes. There is no physical way to blow up those dams using conventional explosives. The only risk those dams face is flotation due to bouyancy (not does happen in modern designs), overtopping the dam (water flow over the dam can actually cause it to disintegrate very quickly, believe it or not) or sliding (also doesn't happen in modern designs).

Source: I'm an engineer, I build dams for a living. Yes, I earn a lot of money.

Cunt.

Dams have destroyed millions of acres of wetland and riparian habitat in the US alone and wreck water tables to boot. Once Gen IV nuclear gets off the ground I hope they dynamite all of them.

Pretty much these, plus I suspect that these are either:

or

If they really were trying to conquer it, they'd have already blown a few power plants or key infrastructure sites by now and flung shit at the iconic buildings and statues. What we're seeing here is, in my opinion, an increasingly bolder string of messages thrown at France: surrender or get ready, pretty much. They already control through birth rates a good chunk of the country, but they still haven't gotten all of it yet.

environmentalists get caught breaking in and vandalizing them all the time

...

DODFAGS GET OUT REEEEEEEEEEE
GO BACK TO YOUR C.O.G. BUNKER HOVEL

It's all in the numbers.

#1: That's Terror.

#2: That's Terror.

#3: Attacking infrastructure without direct massive casualties is not terror. To most people, it's just a damn inconvenience. That's not terror. LA Traffic, for instance, kills a few people each day, and wastes person-lifetimes worth of hours every day, yet people still line up by the millions to take part in it.

Lobbing a mortar shell into an electrical substation might shut down a whole city for a while, perhaps even more efficiently than blowing up a ton of people, but it's never going to achieve any sort of political objective.

notice the change of IDs
I am not commenting on the quality of the info, however.

Shut the fuck up autist, milfags sometimes give us amazing info we otherwise wouldn't have access to, just like the user you replied to just did.

the faggot cited public information like the little cock sucking confidentiality abiding FAGGOT he is

Jews and muslims are two castes of the same civilization. They are on the same team.

The point of terror is to kill as many people as possible with minimal effort.

You need better explosives to that
Guarded by security they are hard to infiltrate
Same as bridges, the IED's they make can't demolish the thick concrete.

They'll go for soft targets to get the high score. I'd expect another terror attack on public transport or festivals.

pick one

HEARTS AND MINDS

When you pick soft targets, you hurt the people. When you pick everyday places, you put fear into every normal person.

Allah ackbar soft target→chaos for 2 days→westerners lose shit→insecure sheeple rally behind SJWs and replacing (((social media))) photo or cuckservatives pretending to hardline→ peaceful practitioners of peace become ever more increasingly insular→alienated sandniggers look for outlet in confusing world where people respect women and wash their hands→ new recruits to jihad flavor of the week→ allah ackbar soft target

...

wow
such terrorism
much religious hate
very anti-semitism
wow

Gas yourself, mehmet.

m8 what?

Critical infrastructure….like the heart of the financial system, the Pentagon or the White house?

I don't know whether you are new or simply have a short term memory but a long while ago it was uncovered, though ignored by the mainstream media, that a nuclear plant worker in Brussels (IIRC) had his ID stolen by muslims.

Attacking critical infrastructure requires planning and intelligence, both of which retards with first cousins as parents severely lack.

It took a Saudi royal 10 years and millions to organize 9/11. Most muslims are too stupid to even understand how shoe laces work.

They want the infrastructure intact so they can use it after they take over.

You're almost right.

But the reality is that when they said we will never have another war like WW2 again… Oh boy did they mean it.

Thus warfare has evolved.

Plus the fact that it's not in the game plan right now to commit mass destruction and eliminate creditors en masse.

top kek

Believe me, any kind of infrastructure that is an attractive target to muslims is under heavy protection since the rise of (((radical terrorism))) in the last years.

infrastructure is protected
you are not

Muslims arent very intelligent. Only Bin Laden really knew what he was doing

Thanks for that news; my Ivy League graduate degree didn't teach me that.

Dams have also provided water and energy to millions of people, especially in dry areas like Nevada.

The alternatives are: you don't live in the desert at all, or you pump all of the aquifers dry within 50 years and run out of water.

If you think that the only purpose of dams is hydroelectric energy, you shouldn't have dropped out of school. In fact, a little known fact about hydroelectric energy is that at night, the power plant at the base of the dam pumps water back up into the reservoir because electricity is cheaper at night, so they sell electricity during the day and use it at night to refill the reservoir.

I support nuclear energy too, fewer environmental issues, but you're still a retard.

Portuguese synagogues always have a couple of guys in tracksuits pretending to be busy at their doors for the whole day.

It's terrorism OP.

You go after soft targets repeatedly and strike fear into the local populace.

Once they finally break and civil war happens you go after the infrastructure and than inshallah akbar them all.

Infrastructure of any worth is guarded and monitored. Citizens gathering in public have zero worth to governments, and are not protected much. Citizens are soft, easy targets.

Every shitskin's dreamgirl

Because that would make most people uncomfortable enough to remove kebab.

And they want to destroy European culture. They would be going after more important places if young people were not retarded and still cared about higher culture.

They will eventually get their hands on something nuclear and blow up one of the capitals, though. It's only a matter of time.