London Attacks

[Jay84]

Tiny bit off topic, but have you seen the shooting in Orlando? 5 dead because a disgruntled employee went on a rampage. How do you profile something like that?

[Ekona]

Don't be crap to your employees

[coldel]

Worth a read https://justice.org.uk/counter-terrorism-human-rights/

[coldel]

Tiny bit off topic, but have you seen the shooting in Orlando? 5 dead because a disgruntled employee went on a rampage. How do you profile something like that?

 

Somewhat ironically this happens whilst Trump has another at the London Mayor, so whilst his well backed gun laws allow pretty much any tom dick and harry to buy one, more people are murdered in terrorist acts in the US which Trump seems unconcerned about.

[Jay84]

I was at the pub last night where someone suggested we shouldn't call them terrorists as it validates them, just call them murderers.

[TT350]

It's exasperating. There's no solution.

 

We just have to take it because we can't profile a whole race.

 

It's like handguns. Blanket ban because of a couple of nutters misuse. That can't be applied here. It isn't fair to do it because they're not all the same. How can there be a solution?

 

The only definitive solution is another crusade or ethnic cleansing but they're absolutely preposterous and make us no better than Hitler.

 

Is talking to them out of the question? Do we think they'd leave us alone if we left them alone? Open up a dialogue.

Edited June 5, 2017 by TT350

[Jetpilot]

deciding to hire a van, pick up a knife from his kitchen and head off out the door...

 

Very much so, i think i have said elsewhere in threads surrounding gun laws, a car/van/lorry is equally as much of a weapon in the wrong hands and you wouldnt even have to try hard to get one.

 

Having said though, they dont seem to be featured too much in Peter and Jane book one of terrorism, the mo generally seems to be ied's.

 

So having defended our security services and laws, lets take the Manchester bomber as an example, now knowing his history, which probably isnt even all the gory details, just snippets, if he was leaving the country and travelling to Lybia, would you deem it inappropriate to give him the "choice" that if he travels there he has his passport revoked?

Edited June 5, 2017 by Jetpilot

[StevoD]

possibly a twisted way of looking at things but someone made a good point at the weekend

 

on Saturday more than 7 people would have died on UK roads of which wouldn't have been their fault,

 

its horrific and the police dealt with it but if the media dropped the coverage of it would the terrorists be so pushed to do it if they know it wouldn't get the lime light. and there actions got swept under the rug?

[Jetpilot]

I remember some while ago there was some preacher dude in the middle of america somewhere who was threatening to burn a Koran, there was outcry, but why did anybody need to know, just let him get on and burn it, if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to here it, does it make a sound...

Edited June 5, 2017 by Jetpilot

[Zeezeebaba]

The ideological cancer is already present.At present we are treating the disease we can see. But an ideology spreads among the disillusioned and disaffected and spreads to the lowest denominator. When these people link up and discuss their viewpoints some will inevitably go on to formulate under the radar of the resources at hand to us.

These people identify with the ideology and want to be part of something in their view that's justified.

For some the lack of empathy for others is justified by radical interpretation of Islam and or current and past atrocities committed abroad against Islamic people in their particular sect.

Some are mentally incompetent some are not.

The crux for us is maintaining the liberty to which we are accustomed and avoiding totalitarian actions which could escalate the problem or drive it deeper underground.

ISIS as a military force is dwindling abroad, it's highly unlikely the home grown attacks are ordered but the ideological message continues to be a strong catalyst for those who feel justified in what they do.

 

There is no cure for this cancer aside from educating the younger generation and gaining the right amount of support from the communities knowingly or not that are harbouring such individuals.

[Zeezeebaba]

The security forces will be pretty stretched this week as we will have plenty of soft targets in the form of polling stations on election day. A strike at infidel democracy would be a major victory for them.

[Jetpilot]

I would imagine a major victory would be a person in authority?

[Strudul]

possibly a twisted way of looking at things but someone made a good point at the weekend

 

on Saturday more than 7 people would have died on UK roads of which wouldn't have been their fault,

 

its horrific and the police dealt with it but if the media dropped the coverage of it would the terrorists be so pushed to do it if they know it wouldn't get the lime light. and there actions got swept under the rug?

Isn't the death rate in the UK something like 1.5k per day?

 

Even considering a good portion of that is just old people expiring, there's plenty of avoidable / preventable deaths that statistically outweigh the number of deaths by terror attacks.

 

I'm not denying how awful the events are, just that in the grand scheme of things it's, to be blunt, insignificant. If money / resources / awareness was channelled elsewhere, we could prevent a lot more unnecessary deaths.

 

(Out of date infographic, but the trends are similar)

[Jay84]

This is isn't a slight against anything said, but the difference is the deliberate loss of life. Car accidents and illness are tragic for those involved. If someone died on the roads through extreme road rage, it'd be reported. What makes these things a talking point is that someone has actively made the decision to take someones life by force. I agree that we could save more lives by investing in curing of diseases and accident prevention, but it seems somewhat redundant in my eyes with nutters roaming around.

 

 

Or consider this; the total loss of life these past 2 weeks, how do we know the death toll wouldn't be 1000 times as big without the current investment?

Like I said, I'm not being argumentative with Strudul and StevoD, and agree its an interesting point. In my eyes though, counting death through life (sorry best way I could phrase it), is as similar as comparing MCR/London with soldiers on the battle field. Yes their death is a tragic loss, directly affecting nearest and dearest and they died fighting for our country. But they signed on to that way of life, in the same way a racing driver knows he might crash and die.

Does that make sense or am I rambling now?

[Strudul]

Obviously measures should be taken to prevent terror attacks else there is a good chance those statistics could drastically rise. I just disagree with the amount of publicity.

 

Here's an example / question. Would you rather:

- 1000 people died every day, but none are murders?

OR

- 500 people died every day, but 10 of those are murders?

 

It's similar to the question regarding the morals of self-driving cars and who they should run over should the worst happen - 1 child or 2 adults?

Edited June 5, 2017 by Strudul

[Jay84]

Traditionally 2 things stop this kind of thing appearing in the media: 1) Its wiped out. 2) It becomes so commonplace its no longer news.

It was mentioned earlier; if its not reported, and there is no 'fame' for the dead, would it still happen?

[Strudul]

You mean like if a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, did it really make a sound?

[sipar69]

I find comments about numbers in these sorts of discussions a bit depressing. We're not computers or robots. Of course, statistically the numbers killed in London and Manchester aren't huge in the grand scheme of things, but it's the shocking, hateful nature of the acts and the fact that they are born out of deluded religous ignorance and hatred for our way of life that elevates their significance beyond mere numbers.

[Jay84]

That's the one. Its an interesting point. Our horror validates their actions

[Jay84]

I find comments about numbers in these sorts of discussions a bit depressing. We're not computers or robots. Of course, statistically the numbers killed in London and Manchester aren't huge in the grand scheme of things, but it's the shocking, hateful nature of the acts and the fact that they are born out of deluded religous ignorance and hatred for our way of life that elevates their significance beyond mere numbers.

Dammit, thats what I meant, it just took me twice as many words and probably twice as long and it still came out a mess. (mine not your)

[Strudul]

I find comments about numbers in these sorts of discussions a bit depressing. We're not computers or robots. Of course, statistically the numbers killed in London and Manchester aren't huge in the grand scheme of things, but it's the shocking, hateful nature of the acts and the fact that they are born out of deluded religous ignorance and hatred for our way of life that elevates their significance beyond mere numbers.

So you'd rather more people die if it meant none of the deaths were murders? Likewise you'd prefer 2 adults got run over instead of 1 child?

I'm not sure there is necessarily a right or wrong answer, it's just opinion and interpretation of what is morally correct.

 

It just seems like everyone jumps on the bandwagon of the latest event, then forgets about it a week later and moves onto some other tragedy.

[StevoD]

This is isn't a slight against anything said, but the difference is the deliberate loss of life. Car accidents and illness are tragic for those involved. If someone died on the roads through extreme road rage, it'd be reported. What makes these things a talking point is that someone has actively made the decision to take someones life by force. I agree that we could save more lives by investing in curing of diseases and accident prevention, but it seems somewhat redundant in my eyes with nutters roaming around.

 

 

Or consider this; the total loss of life these past 2 weeks, how do we know the death toll wouldn't be 1000 times as big without the current investment?

Like I said, I'm not being argumentative with Strudul and StevoD, and agree its an interesting point. In my eyes though, counting death through life (sorry best way I could phrase it), is as similar as comparing MCR/London with soldiers on the battle field. Yes their death is a tragic loss, directly affecting nearest and dearest and they died fighting for our country. But they signed on to that way of life, in the same way a racing driver knows he might crash and die.

Does that make sense or am I rambling now?

 

your not arguing with me im just putting an interesting pov i heard at the weekend

[sipar69]

I find comments about numbers in these sorts of discussions a bit depressing. We're not computers or robots. Of course, statistically the numbers killed in London and Manchester aren't huge in the grand scheme of things, but it's the shocking, hateful nature of the acts and the fact that they are born out of deluded religous ignorance and hatred for our way of life that elevates their significance beyond mere numbers.

So you'd rather more people die if it meant none of the deaths were murders? Likewise you'd prefer 2 adults got run over instead of 1 child?

I'm not sure there is necessarily a right or wrong answer, it's just opinion and interpretation of what is morally correct.

 

It just seems like everyone jumps on the bandwagon of the latest event, then forgets about it a week later and moves onto some other tragedy.

 

Nobody's jumping on a bandwagon. People are just reacting naturally to disturbing events that feel very close to home, literally and figuratively.

[TT350]

possibly a twisted way of looking at things but someone made a good point at the weekend

 

on Saturday more than 7 people would have died on UK roads of which wouldn't have been their fault,

 

its horrific and the police dealt with it but if the media dropped the coverage of it would the terrorists be so pushed to do it if they know it wouldn't get the lime light. and there actions got swept under the rug?

 

I can't get with this mentality at all mate. No offence.

 

Accidents happen. Disasters happen. Loss of life is a horrible thing.

 

Murder on any level should never be tolerated and it should never become un-noteworthy. I'm not sure I'd want to be around when it is just accepted and unworthy of emotion.

 

There are millions of drivers and millions of cars. Accidents happen every day. And if it's of a particular nature, it usually makes the regional news.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

[coldel]

It's exasperating. There's no solution.

 

We just have to take it because we can't profile a whole race.

 

It's like handguns. Blanket ban because of a couple of nutters misuse. That can't be applied here. It isn't fair to do it because they're not all the same. How can there be a solution?

 

The only definitive solution is another crusade or ethnic cleansing but they're absolutely preposterous and make us no better than Hitler.

 

Is talking to them out of the question? Do we think they'd leave us alone if we left them alone? Open up a dialogue.

 

I think the solution is to erode their influence abroad and to continue to work hard at making them outcasts in their own religious groups here in the UK so they become more visible to intelligence agencies. Simply rounding people up is effectively putting a plaster over a wound that never heals, you need to go right to the root cause and hit them there. Just my tuppence worth as a complete non-expert on foreign affairs and anti-terror intelligence.