Just when embattled French President Francois Hollande was seeing glimmers of hope in the economic indicators, this happens. The most fatalities in a terrorist attack for Europe since, well, since a bomb aboard a Russian Metrojet plane killed 224 two weeks earlier.

The Socialist leader responded to Islamic State’s rapid claim of responsibility for killing 129 Parisians last Friday with an immediate foreign policy lurch to the right. He declared war on IS, urging Russia and the United States to join his escalating bombardments. French warplanes, launched from Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, have attacked IS strongholds in and around Raqqa in northern Syria for the last four days. Late reports claim 33 IS militants have been killed. No numbers for civilian casualties.

Hollande’s decision to bomb the merde out of IS strongholds — but not send in ground troops — has not, however, united the republic. It has left him open to criticisms from all sides.

Militants on the right consider this inadequate. Prominent depute for Haute-Garonne Gerard Bapt said: “The only priority is to eradicate IS and its allies, neutralise all their accomplices, including states, and cut the supply of funds or arms to jihadist groups.”

Coming at Hollande from the left, others insisted violence begat violence, that air attacks had not worked in the past and wouldn’t work now. Leader of Lutte Ouvriere (Workers’ Struggle Party) Nathalie Arthaud said the atrocities in Paris were “despicable acts”. But she blamed the French state and its political leaders: “They have a large share of responsibility for the wars that bloodied the Middle East today … Therefore Lutte Ouvriere will not add its voice to the chorus of national unity.”

Likely 2017 presidential candidate Jean-Christophe Lagarde of the Union of Democrats and Independents agreed: “We must stick together, united behind the executive who must take the necessary measures and behind our security forces, but also accept that we caused the conflict, whether intentional or not.”

Hollande’s response to security at home was equally divisive. He must have been tempted to accept the policy advice offered instantly by highly visible former president Nicholas Sarkozy. Bipartisanship is positive symbolism. Plus it would likely neutralise the whole issue if Sarkozy runs for president against Hollande in 2017, as now seems certain.

Sarkozy’s drastic solutions included: that all 11,500 people on fichier S — a watchlist of suspected radicalised activists — be placed under immediate house arrest with electronic bracelets; that radical imams be expelled and their mosques closed; dual or non-citizens involved with jihad abroad be deported; French citizens returning home from jihad be imprisoned; and tighter weapons controls. He promised bipartisan support in l’Assemblee nationale for them all.

Hollande implemented some of these. A state of emergency was declared. Dozens of suspects have been arrested for questioning in France, Belgium and Germany. Raids on hundreds of properties have yielded arms including a rocket launcher and automatic weapons. He increased funds for national security and foreshadowed stronger anti-terrorism laws. He authorised the distribution of an antidote for nerve gas from military stockpiles as a precaution against attacks on civilians. Yesterday (Australia time), an extended siege and gun battle with police in Paris resulted in two suspects dead, five officers injured and several arrests.

These domestic measures were not enough for la droite. National Front’s Marine Le Pen and prominent local politicians called for an immediate end to all migration and all national borders closed.

In the cafes et sur les terrasses, divergent views are readily expressed on both the causes of the Paris atrocities and the responses. Often, differing opinions appear in the one sentence.

One woman told Crikey: “The airstrikes are just more violence — which causes hatred. But I guess France has to show that the terrorists are not stopping us. They have to be punished. But that will not destroy the leaders of IS. They must plan a James Bond operation to do that.”

A strong supporter of Hollande at the last election went further and said “the airstrikes will just lead to more reprisals on French soil in the near future”. So is she disappointed with the President? “Oui. But that started a long time ago.”

Clearly there are others who believe domestic security is not tight enough and the military response inadequate. Some elusive citoyens no doubt believe the response is right. So there is a range of reactions.

What is missing, however, is any sense that citizens have a voice. Emperor Augustus told the Gauls not to expect responsiveness when he ran the place. It seems they haven’t forgotten.

So there is resignation at the greater police presence, slower traffic, increased security checks, curfews, random searches, and the cancellation of public events. And there is acceptance that the government must be seen to respond with military might — against someone, anyone — resolutely and rapidly.

Overlaying all this is the almost universal affirmation that life must go on — we must bake the baguettes, chill the Champagne, serve the aperitif and celebrate with family and friends. If we stay home cowering under our beds then the terrorists have won.