3 ms·

Yes I do. Let's not forget that ISIS almost managed to take over Syria and Irak, what makes you think they would not take over France if the French let them? A

by mafribe 10y ago

Yes I do. Let's not forget that ISIS almost managed to take over Syria and Irak, what makes you think they would not take over France if the French let them? A hand full of socialist revolutionaries took over Russia, and ruled for nearly a century. Francisco Pizarro with took over the Inca empire with just 168 men, 1 cannon and 27 horses! The Inca empire was one of the largest seen in human history at the time. Actually a handful of revolutionaries took over France in 1789.

maze-le 10y ago
You forget that in both instances of the 'handful of revolutionaries' you quote had full popular support on their side. The terrorists have neither popular support nor superior weaponry (the pizarro example). I also doubt that this is a goal of these groups, the goal is to spread fear so that popular opinion in France turns against the muslim minority. This in turn, gives these groups a pool of new recruits.
- sevenless 10y ago
  I think Pizarro had some religious support too. The Incans had a prophecy about 'white people' coming from the gods, and he just happened to turn up at the right time...
  - mafribe 10y ago
    This is just nonsensical. The main reason why the Spanish were successful was political: the Incas (which means "rulers") had forged their empire with violence and the tribes they subjugated were only too happy to get rid of the Incas, so collaborated on a case-by-case basis with the Spanish. In addition, the ruling family (i.e. the Incas) was quarrelling amongst each other, with some of them collaborating with the Spanish to get rid of the other side of the family. The idea was: (1) let the Spanish do the dirty work of getting rid of the other side, and (2) then get rid of the Spanish. Part 1 worked very well, Part 2 ... not so much. It's pretty clear that Pizarro was in a fairly weak and tenuous position. If the Incas had worked together, rather than fighting among themselves, they would have defeated Pizarro easily.
    - sevenless 10y ago
      I was wrong about Pizarro. With the 'mistaken for a prophecy' bit, I was thinking of Cortés and Montezuma. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cortes_hernan.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cortes_hernan....
- mafribe 10y ago
  ISIS have neither popular support nor superior weaponry? Are you sure? ISIS is supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar (who are probably money laundering fronts for certain other states that shall remain anonymous). Pizarro had one cannon, and cannons at that time were awkward, especially in the mountains.

by mafribe 10y ago

maze-le 10y ago

You forget that in both instances of the 'handful of revolutionaries' you quote had full popular support on their side. The terrorists have neither popular support nor superior weaponry (the pizarro example). I also doubt that this is a goal of these groups, the goal is to spread fear so that popular opinion in France turns against the muslim minority. This in turn, gives these groups a pool of new recruits.

sevenless 10y ago
I think Pizarro had some religious support too. The Incans had a prophecy about 'white people' coming from the gods, and he just happened to turn up at the right time...
- mafribe 10y ago
  This is just nonsensical. The main reason why the Spanish were successful was political: the Incas (which means "rulers") had forged their empire with violence and the tribes they subjugated were only too happy to get rid of the Incas, so collaborated on a case-by-case basis with the Spanish. In addition, the ruling family (i.e. the Incas) was quarrelling amongst each other, with some of them collaborating with the Spanish to get rid of the other side of the family. The idea was: (1) let the Spanish do the dirty work of getting rid of the other side, and (2) then get rid of the Spanish. Part 1 worked very well, Part 2 ... not so much. It's pretty clear that Pizarro was in a fairly weak and tenuous position. If the Incas had worked together, rather than fighting among themselves, they would have defeated Pizarro easily.
  - sevenless 10y ago
    I was wrong about Pizarro. With the 'mistaken for a prophecy' bit, I was thinking of Cortés and Montezuma. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cortes_hernan.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cortes_hernan....
mafribe 10y ago
ISIS have neither popular support nor superior weaponry? Are you sure? ISIS is supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar (who are probably money laundering fronts for certain other states that shall remain anonymous). Pizarro had one cannon, and cannons at that time were awkward, especially in the mountains.