Explosion In London

[Hitro]

For my part, I used to be one of those "peaceful" people. I finally got sick and tired of being stepped on. Having a clean slate as a peaceful non-violent person wasn't worth the humiliation. It also had really bad dating prospects. Since I became willing to beat the crap out of somebody who wrongs me, my life all around improved greatly.

Not necessarily wrong, but it is undeniably also the kind of thinking that makes the Islamic terrorists do what they do. They feel bullied by the US and its "gang" (the West) and decided not to just turn the other cheek but to kick them in the nuts.

I can see your point on a personal level, though.

 

[bigfatron]

That's the problem. People all over the world have completely different views on it. And it's impossible to make them all happy. The ones who are not happy become your candidates for suicide bombings.

World history is chock full of violence. It's also full of incidents of peaceful peoples, who never attacked anybody in their entire history, getting stomped on by belligerent neighbors.

For my part, I used to be one of those "peaceful" people. I finally got sick and tired of being stepped on. Having a clean slate as a peaceful non-violent person wasn't worth the humiliation. It also had really bad dating prospects. Since I became willing to beat the crap out of somebody who wrongs me, my life all around improved greatly.

But the world is NOT 'chock-full' of violence - violence is only the third cause of death, miles and miles behind starvation and disease, and roughly on a par with road accidents!

As well describe the world as full of car crashes...

What the world is REALLY full of is people who want to get on with a chance to live their life with a reasonable expectation of a fair wage (i.e. enough to feed themselves and family on) and/or a chance to grow enough food to eat, and hopefully some functioning education and medical facilties.

Other than that they pretty much want to be left alone to get on with their lives and give their kids a bit more than they had for themselves.

seeing and identifying violence as the norm only perpetuates the belief that it is a rational and acceptable way to deal with our problems. The problem with that idea is that most of the victims, as we saw yesterday, will be the innocent.

Violence is wrong....

 

[Jorge]

That is extremely difficult. You have to overcome the ethnic, language, religious, cultural backgrounds for a scant pay (no more than 3.000 euros), no recognition, no social life whatsoever, risk your integrity etc.. all for patriotism.

The Spanish CIA (CNI) put ads looking for people with this profile. You have to hunt them in Ceuta and Melilla. Hardly any university student who studies arab will fit the role. They have to be street wise people with murky backgrounds who are able to infiltrate successfully, no mainstream people and no military are suitable.

Nigh impossible.

It´s difficult with the means available, but the more money available, the easier it is. As I said before, we don´t need so many tanks or warships (after all, an invasion is very unlikely even if we had half our millitary strengh), so we can transfer budget from there.

 

[Jorge]

For my part, I used to be one of those "peaceful" people. I finally got sick and tired of being stepped on. Having a clean slate as a peaceful non-violent person wasn't worth the humiliation. It also had really bad dating prospects. Since I became willing to beat the crap out of somebody who wrongs me, my life all around improved greatly.

The problem is that the USA is not beating the terrorist that perpetrated the 9/11 for example. Bin Laden is still free, and the use of brute force in Iraq (that had nothing to do with terrorism) has only caused more terrorism. Brute force just doesn´t work when you don´t know exactly who attacked you and where he is.

 

[Olorin0222]

Increase intelligence capabilities? At what price?

Security and freedom are like a seesaw: The more secure and stable a nation is, the less freedoms it has, and the more freedoms it has the less secure and stable it is. The people of France gave up all the freedoms they had gained in their revolution for the added stability they saw in L'empereur. Rome did the same with the ascension of Caesar.

After 9/11, the U.S. quickly passed the Patriot Act, which increased the methods the CIA and FBI could use to spy on our own citizens. Now, a bipartisan effort is rolling back that act, believing it gave too much power to counterintelligence.

The safest places in the world from terrorism are totalitarian regimes like China, North Korea, Vietnam, etc. Why? Because these nations fight terrorists with their own brand of state terrorism. They remind people who think they have nothing to live for that they do have something to live for. Is that how we, the free nations of the world, want to become to defeat terrorism?

We are seeing a new trend over the past 18 months of terrorists using Mass Transportation as their preferred means to strike. First their were the train bombings around Moscow, then Madrid 16 months ago, last month there was an attempted bombing of a train between Grozny, Chechnya and Moscow, and now London. All targeted mostly rails. They are moving away from the airlines of 9/11. Why? THe world's increased security aboard airlines is working. It is not as easy anymore to hijack an airplane. So is the answer now to screen people at rail stations and bus stations? that is up for debate. But let's assume that we do, and their are screeners at every station. terrorists will do what they do in Israel: either drive in their car with a load of explosives, or walk to a busy area and detonate themselves. We can't screen everything. Sadly, as long as we remain a free society, terrorists will keep changing tatics to attack our weak underbelly.

The answer on what to do next is debatable. My opinion is that we need to make life uncomfortable for those who support terrorism. Without backing, weapons, money, and places to raise training camps, these terrorists lose their fangs, and will only be able to do one-man missions like the Oklahoma City bombing over 10 years ago. nothing as coordinated as this.

 

[Olorin0222]

The death toll is up over 50 now.

 

[Taliesin]

@Taliesin. Your list of the effects and sufferings went well beyond what was required to make your point, and far beyond what was tasteful & appropriate. It makes your condolences sound insincere, and gives the overall post the appearance of a loosely disguised "you had it coming".

I assure you that that was far from my intention, and that my condolences were entirely sincere. I apologise if my post offended, but in coming to terms with an horrific event like this, I don't think it helps much to sanitise its results. I was attempting to communicate my anger and disgust at the killings. Tastefulness? I'm not sure that tastefulness is an appropriate response to mass murder. What I wrote was a raw reaction to the knowledge that people like you or me, doing the daily things that you and I take for granted, were plunged into such otherworldly chaos. We're not used to this happening here, in the First World, so it stuns us, stuns me, when it occurs.

You sense correctly an element of "you had it coming", but misinterpret it. Did the people who suffered the attack deserve it? Of course not. What I mean is that we all have it coming, that we can expect more of the same-- but never that the victims deserve it. I take no pleasure in this and am not expressing satisfaction at what occurred. I meant merely to observe that events like these are not random, do not happen in a vacuum. They are the tangible results of foreign policy, felt no longer just in other countries but at home.

Again, my apologies if my reaction offended you.

 

[Bugfatty300]

The safest places in the world from terrorism are totalitarian regimes like China, North Korea, Vietnam, etc. Why? Because these nations fight terrorists with their own brand of state terrorism. They remind people who think they have nothing to live for that they do have something to live for. Is that how we, the free nations of the world, want to become to defeat terrorism?

Very true

Terrorism is much more safe in democratic societies were the government has less interference in the lives of citizens, giving them more room to operate with out fear of discovery or arrest.

North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam and China are nearly (if not completely) devoid of foreign and domestic terrorism because their governments has a much greater ability to find and hunt them down via secret police ect and intrusive laws and statutes.

That cannot be said for the US who has suffers a major attack every 5 years or so, much less Europe and the UK.

The US and Europe are home to dozens of radical terrorist organizations that act with violence on a regular basis.

Can you imagine such groups in China? They would be hunted down to the man as enemies of the state.

 

[Olorin0222]

@bugfatty300: That is what I was saying when I said "The safest places in the world from (not for) terrorism are totalitarian regimes". There is no terrorism in those type of countries.

 

[Bugfatty300]

@bugfatty300: That is what I was saying when I said "The safest places in the world from (not for) terrorism are totalitarian regimes". There is no terrorism in those type of countries.

Oh my bad.

Then I agree with you

 

[nonconformist]

Did Blair claim the IRA was responsible for this on TV?

You misunderstand-I did not say Blair said it was. they were jsut two unrelated sentences.

 

[CurtSibling]

That cannot be said for the US who has suffers a major attack every 5 years or so, much less Europe and the UK.

Much less in the UK?

Are you aware of the IRA's anti-UK terror campaign that went on for decades?

How about France's troubles with the Algerians, or Spain's long and bitter war with the separatists?
Surely you have heard of Russia's terrorism problems with Muslim chechnya?

With all due respect:
Europe and the UK have been bombed and attacked many more times than the USA.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

I apologise if my post offended, but in coming to terms with an horrific event like this, I don't think it helps much to sanitise its results. I was attempting to communicate my anger and disgust at the killings.

We've got plenty of pictures, TV film, eye witness accounts - these are what give us the raw view of the actual impact, not you reciting a list of a dozen awful things which you imagine occurred. In the context of the point you were making, you could have done it far more effectively without the over-extended list. You clearly didn't consider how your list would have read to anyone who had friends or relatives involved, or perhaps didn't yet know of a friend or colleague's whereabouts.

Again, my apologies if my reaction offended you.

Accepted.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Much less in the UK?

He didn't say much less bombing in the UK & Europe. His post actually implies that Europe and the UK are more subject to foreign and domestic terrorism.

 

[chancellor_dan]

I assure you that that was far from my intention, and that my condolences were entirely sincere. I apologise if my post offended, but in coming to terms with an horrific event like this, I don't think it helps much to sanitise its results. I was attempting to communicate my anger and disgust at the killings. Tastefulness? I'm not sure that tastefulness is an appropriate response to mass murder. What I wrote was a raw reaction to the knowledge that people like you or me, doing the daily things that you and I take for granted, were plunged into such otherworldly chaos. We're not used to this happening here, in the First World, so it stuns us, stuns me, when it occurs.

You sense correctly an element of "you had it coming", but misinterpret it. Did the people who suffered the attack deserve it? Of course not. What I mean is that we all have it coming, that we can expect more of the same-- but never that the victims deserve it. I take no pleasure in this and am not expressing satisfaction at what occurred. I meant merely to observe that events like these are not random, do not happen in a vacuum. They are the tangible results of foreign policy, felt no longer just in other countries but at home.

Again, my apologies if my reaction offended you.

I for one do not think your post was in any way inappropriate.

 

[chancellor_dan]

We've got plenty of pictures, TV film, eye witness accounts - these are what give us the raw view of the actual impact, not you reciting a list of a dozen awful things which you imagine occurred. In the context of the point you were making, you could have done it far more effectively without the over-extended list. You clearly didn't consider how your list would have read to anyone who had friends or relatives involved, or perhaps didn't yet know of a friend or colleague's whereabouts.

If you regard his description as in any way graphic, i suggest you read the eyewitness accounts in the papers more closely. Witnesses in "The Times" talk of seeing a woman's head and body lying in the street...all arms and legs detached.

There is no point disguising the awful truth.

 

[chancellor_dan]

That Taliesin didn't witness the occurance doesn't mean he can't graphically describe the outcome.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Much less in the UK?

Are you aware of the IRA's anti-UK terror campaign that went on for decades?

How about France's troubles with the Algerians, or Spain's long and bitter war with the separatists?
Surely you have heard of Russia's terrorism problems with Muslim chechnya?

With all due respect:
Europe and the UK have been bombed and attacked many more times than the USA.

You misunderstood that.

I meant, "it cannot be said for the US and much less UK and Europe" as in totalitarian-like tactics in controling people, like North Korea and China.

The stuff I added in was just an example.....

Please note the bolded.

That cannot be said for the US who has suffers a major attack every 5 years or so, much less Europe and the UK.

The US and Europe are home to dozens of radical terrorist organizations that act with violence on a regular basis.

 

[CurtSibling]

OK - Accepted...

Excuse the misunderstanding on my part.

.

 

[JoeM]

Again, my apologies if my reaction offended you.

Accepted also.

@ Lambert Simnel

Please be careful with the ID card issue, I've overstated my opinion on this issue in two other threads already and I've protested in Parliament Square about it. I regard myself as an interested party, as a database security consultant, and implore you to contact your MP and urge them to vote against it.

Ever hear about the erosion of freedoms? Carrying on our British way of life? The national ID database is a giant step towards ending personal freedom and won't even help against terrorism.

I won't blather on about it, but please check out the other threads and no2id.org for more info.