This will be our reply to violence...

The words are going to be shown on the big screens at the game tonight.

Actually not Napoleon, TriciaF, it was a song of the Revolution and predates him by 7 years as he did not come to power until after a coup d'etat in 1799, subsequently proclaiming himself Emperor in 1804.

Yes of course Napoleon.
Maybe they've had enough of wars now, after the war with Germany in 1870, the WWs 1&2, the Algerian war, etc.

It was indeed an anthem of the French Revolution

"The song was written in 1792 by Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle in Strasbourg after the declaration of war by France against Austria, and was originally titled "Chant de guerre pour l'Armée du Rhin". The Marseillaise was a revolutionary song, an anthem to freedom, a patriotic call to mobilize all the citizens and an exhortation to fight against tyranny and foreign invasion. The French National Convention adopted it as the Republic's anthem in 1795. It acquired its nickname after being sung in Paris by volunteers from Marseille "

The words are brilliant!

I think the words of the Marseillaise are from the Revolution.

They were quite warlike under Napoleon!

The French don't seem to be by nature very warlike. More philosophical, emotional, family centred.
I don't know where the Marseillaise words come from. ?Pre-Revolution?

P.William has said he will be at the match and the Met has said armed officers will be in the grounds

Getting back to OP (now that's a novel idea) how about tomorrow night's football friendly between England and France at Wembley.
"Allons enfants de la Patrie!"

Even more terrifying is the fact he has much support in his election bid , imagine if he became president - no best not to think of that

Only terrifying if he is ever elected President!

He is terrifying.

He is barking rosequartz

annie

I also just thought it was ironic that he said he would not let them have the oil but would take it for America .....

No rosequartz, not the - I would knock the hell etc. But on the financing of IS

Never thought I would agree with Trump
Me neither, but it is only on the one point:

I would knock out the source of their wealth, the primary source of their wealth, which is oil",

but I doubt you - or I - would agree with the rest of the statement anniebach:
“I would knock the hell out of them, but I’d put a ring around it and I’d take the oil for our country.”

Never thought I would agree with Trump

From the BBC website about IS funding -

Islamic State initially relied on wealthy private donors in the Middle East keen to oust Syria's President Bashar al-Assad.

It now makes between $846,000 (£540,000) and $1.645m (£1.05m) a day selling oil from fields in Syria and Iraq.

Middlemen smuggle crude oil and refined products to Turkey and Iran, or sell them to the Syrian government.

Kidnapping has also generated at least $20m (£12.7m) in ransom payments in 2014, according to the US Treasury.

Islamic State raises several million dollars per month through extorting the eight million people under its full or partial control.

Payments are extracted from those who pass through, conduct business in, or simply live in IS territory.

Religious minorities have been forced to pay a special tax, convert to Islam or leave.

Islamic State also profits from robbing banks, looting and selling antiquities, and stealing or controlling the sale of livestock and crops.

Abducted girls and women have allegedly been sold as sex slaves.

Some funding is still derived from wealthy donors and Islamic charities in the Middle East and Europe.

How do we stop this?

The last part is I think what Donald Trump has been saying for a while now.

A letter in today's paper made a good point; terrorists are almost impossible to beat militarily because the ruthlessness it takes to defeat thrm is unacceptable in a democratic world.

It continues that organisations on the scale of IS need money, lots of it. Locating the source of funding and choking off the financial support is a good place to start and likely to be very effective.

Agree with jingl.

There are solutions. Just not easy ones.

I have been reading all the above posts with great interest.

Everyone is appalled but there is no consensus even amongst us few oldies, as to what the solution/way forward should be. Heaven help the politicians. I think the end of European civilization is nigh.

It seems to me that the problem of Daesh in Syria and Iraq needs to be taken in hand by the Arab nations including Turkey as they are the ones most at risk. BUT the issue of the violence perpetrated against the innocent civilians in European countries is another matter entirely. We need to step up our international intelligence activity. Word on the ground and prevention is much to be preferred and will not feed these awful people's desire for notoriety. Knee jerk responses will only give them the excuse to execute further violence against us.

Just my humble opinion! Having lived with so much tit for tat violence in our society in N. Ireland I know it is self perpetuating!

vampirequeen you're right, we are picky about where we intervene and I have always been uncomfortable with that fact. For me though the difference is that IS is a threat to world peace. The enemy is an organisation, not a country and I am not sure if we've faced a threat like this for centuries.

The breaking news is France has launched airstikes against IS tonight, bombing the IS stronghold of Raqqa.

France now says the attacks were planned in Belgium and two of the attackers who died were French nationals living there. Salah Abdeslam, the man they are looking for is Belgian and his brother is one of the attackers who died in the auditorium. Six people have been taken into custody in France and seven people have been arrested in Belgium in connection with Friday's attacks.