GILLES KEPEL, PARIS-BASED SCHOLAR/AUTHOR:

Well, it was different because, as you said, we suffered 239 dead. The reason why we focused on France was that they thought they could take the French political hostage. They thought the more attacks there would be, then the more people would vote for the extreme right because they felt that almost they're more of culprit (ph) or something, and — because you have to remember that the terrorist jihadist wants to proselytize among other Muslims, and they want to sort of bring them under their banner, because most of our Muslim compatriots just loathe them and hate them.

But, you know, they want to say, the French are racist, the French vote for the extreme right, therefore there is no way for you in Europe, and the only way for you to be safe is to rally with us and then to sow jihad and civil strife in country — in Europe, because, you know, this third-generation jihadism, which I describe in my book "Terror in France," thinks that Europe is the soft underbelly of the West, and this is where they have to focus.

In Europe, they want to use a number of disenfranchised young Muslims whom they think see no future in Europe and then are sort of manipulated by the Salafists and think there is a break in values between Islam and European values. And therefore, you know, this is the sort of bolt and nut phenomenon that will lead to mobilization of the masses, because it's easy to kill people, but it's very difficult to mobilize the masses on your behalf. And this is the quandary of terrorism.