Bombs (of this type) kill through concussive force. The fire is brief and not terribly intense. Lay a passport on a pillow and beat it with the flat surface of a book, see how much damage you do. Humans are squishy (pillow) and the force is distributed evenly across the entire surface. Even if the passport were in their pocket when they detonated, there is a very good chance the passport survived completely unscathed. And there's a very good chance they simply left it in their car or hotel room or something like that.
Pulled from Reddit since a few people here doesn't browse it:
http://news.yahoo.com/putin-calls-un...093119045.html
I can only imagine how much of a boner Putin has right now. The Paris attacks gave him all the ammunition he needed to push his agenda of bombing Syria back to the stone age.Moscow (AFP) - Moscow called on Saturday for the international community to unite in its fight against terrorism after a string of attacks in Paris left more than 128 people dead on Friday.
"This tragedy has become another testimony of terrorism's barbarity, which poses a challenge to human civilisation," Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a telegram to French counterpart Francois Hollande, according to the Kremlin.
"It is clear that the real unification of the international community's efforts is needed for an effective fight against this evil."
Putin added that Russia was ready to "closely cooperate" with France in its investigation of the attacks.
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev echoed his president's response, saying in a statement: "The Paris tragedy requires of us all to unite in the fight against extremism, to bring a strong answer to terrorists' actions."
In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the Kremlin offered its condolences, condemning the "hateful" string of attacks and "inhuman murders".
Why does ISIS want to go to war? Do they actually think theyll have success when so far their only successes have been espionage attacks against unarmed civilians? Do they actually expect to find success when the people theyre trying to attack are expecting it and are armed and capable of fighting back?
So all the territory they've held the past few years doesn't count?
Let's not pretend that getting rid of ISIS would be a cakewalk, even with a large number of ground troops.
Trying to make sense the mind of suicide bomber to its finest detail? Good luck.
http://imgur.com/oY5OLd4
Thought this picture was fitting. On phone so can't upload image directly.
http://imgur.com/oY5OLd4
Because they made it into the country legally and have to maintain cover until they carry out nefarious shit? Gotta maintain that cover as a law-abiding resident if you want to get shit done and that might mean keeping your passport on you.
Why would you assume a terrorist wouldn't keep their passport on them? I don't understand what you're trying to convey here.
Maybe they're stupid.
Just spitballing.
I carried mine with me when I was overseas, if for no other reason than I didn't know how much good my FL driver's license would do me if I needed to show my identification for any reason. I kept really close watch on it (it was in my purse but I kept my purse tightly guarded), but yeah, I don't think it's abnormal for people traveling around to have it on them. Some may, some may not. I wouldn't read too much into it.
When I lived in New Zealand for a year, I had my passport in the back left pocket of my jeans 24-7 almost haha. Realize it was stupid, but they did not take American driver's licenses for age-verification when I was there in college.
this is how these guys do, can we get off the passport bit..
..and more on WW3 or not? They got 147 in Kenya in April, but that's far different. We don't add FB profile filters for them.
edit: april deets: they only had to kill 2 campus guards, and it was similarly horrific bloodshed
Maybe they wanted to be identified after martrying for the glory of Allah.
Question to follow a tragedy like this:
If you are against the militarization of police departments, do tragedies like this change that view? I see the problems with it, but it seems like a have it and not need it approach is preferable, no?
No. What would the militarization of police do to prevent this? You can't be everywhere. These things are prevented by intelligence not brute force. And we already have appropriate responders in swat teams.