There are already walls. Its called passport control. You get them when you fly into airports. You are logged as entering the country and flag up if you are a wanted man.

When you travel by land, there are no walls, therefore they think you are still in Syria learning how to shoot stuff, rather than being back in Europe, already shooting stuff.

The west is at a crossroads

Right is integration and assimilation now that it is proven that multiculturalism has failed. Integration and assimilation or separation

Left is an abyss of misogyny, intolerance, homophobia, violence, antisemitism etc - and eventual dhimmitude

I believe that the west has already chosen the right fork but the fog of war is clouding the way - but it'll clear

Well yes. There is also this stuff called water that keeps a lot of people out. The Uk and Aus has found it handy in that respect.

Your constant use of the term 'walls' is slightly ambiguous. If you mean that refugees should still be allowed in but there should be greater restriction and monitoring of movement then I can dig that.

Correct. Add the US to that list too.

Refugees who are escaping awkward conditions are suppose to settle in the first safe haven. In this case that would be places like Jordan or Turkey.

Any further movement is economic migration. Of course, someone who is displaced is going to continue travelling to find the best safe haven if they can.

Europe allows this via land and countries surrounding the EU encourage it.

Europe now has a big problem ahead for allowing free movement. Terrorists can just blend in going unoticed and unlogged.

Time to put the walls up.

Paris attacks: Eight terror suspects named so far are not refugees and have EU passports | Europe | News | The Independent

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/europe-s-open-border-policy-may-become-latest-victim-of-terrorism-1.2435486

1 Hellfire vaporises 10 assholes

Ah, you say. You kill 10 and 100 join their cause

10 Hellfires vaporise 100 assholes

Ah, you say. You kill 100 and 1000 join their cause

100 Hellfires vaporise 1000 assholes

etc

Guess what? They run out of assholes before we run out of Hellfires

Violence has been sorting assholes out for centuries. Violence has ended more conflicts than diplomacy and negotiation. Nothing new today

Diplomacy and negotiation with IS?

That's already been ruled out.

You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone. Al Capone

Exactly

ISIS is like the Terminator - it cannot be reasoned with

Look through history. Violence has sorted more problems out than negotiation/diplomacy

ISIS need to be made an offer they can't refuse

Confirmed - Abdelhamid Abaaoud killed in police raids.

Suspected 'mastermind' of Paris attacks Abdelhamid Abaaoud died in police raid: prosecutor

...... and how easily he shuffled back and forth between Europe and Syria.

Abdelhamid Abaaoud, Alleged Mastermind of Paris Attacks, Was ‘Emir of War’ in Syria - WSJ

Are you seriously trying to suggest open borders and refugee trails do not provide a movement haven for those who have been working with ISIS in Syria?

what puzzles me more than anything is how an attack by IS isn't an attack by, or representative of Islam, but an attack on IS is an attack on Islam. I think some people have a real problem with themselves and how they live, but not so much of a problem that they'll give it all up.

What I'm saying (and have said from the beginning) is that walls and borders are a red herring. And your link demonstrates this (if you'd think about it).

Firstly, he was travelling around, through those borders, because he had a french passport. The whole refugee thing wasn't a player.

Second,
so it was the act of placing him 'on the other side of the line', and not dealing with the known issue of radicalisation in jails, that kicked off his terrorist career.

Third, THEY KNEW HE WAS A DANGER - but they didn't have him on a short enough leash to know what he was doing. In other words it's nothing to do with borders, it's to do organisation, intelligence and attention. And I'll hazard a guess that the reason the intelligence services didn't have these is because they have too many potential terrorists to keep track of (false positives).

The reality is you could have shut down all the borders, it wouldn't really have changed anything - all that needs to travel is an idea. The most dangerous individual is one with a brain - and he had a brain. Once radicalised he could attack via a variety of vectors, even without any other contact with an ISIS 'command'. Him going to syria should have been a cockup on the part ISIS, because it put him on the radar. He succeeded because the intelligence services failed (which you are not hearing about) - nothing to do with borders.

"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

Ripley's First Law of Conflict Resolution.


S