|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
magicjay said:
Quote:
PCG342 said:
... Are you insinuating that America is to blame for this?
No I'm not. I'm saying that the present strategy and policy of the UK/USA hasn't worked. We need to rethink our policy. Bombing the shit out of them has been ineffective.
As horrible as this attack was, i would not call it a successfull attack. I do think our current policies have made it more difficult for them to carry out thier attacks.
However lets accept for premise for a moment and let me ask what YOU suggest we do to stop them. Should we do nothing and hope the problem goes away, should we sit down with the terrorists and try and make nice with them or should we all convert to Islam? Or what other suggestion would you offer?
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188 |
Quote:
rex said:
How?
Osama is still free and al Queda is still able to carry out attacks. Duh!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Let's assume for a moment that this was really Al Quaeda operating in London.
And let's all note that what happened was a terrible thing, as no sane person should argue otherwise.
However, if the "war on terror" is that ineffectual, then why is Al Quaeda no longer carrying out complicated plans that destroy giant buildings and kill thousands? Why are they reduced to fairly simple terrorist plots not significantly different than what Israel endures on a regular basis.
The fact that the "best" they could do in London was a fraction of what they were able to do four years ago in New York, says to me that they are, in fact, on the run, and that the war on terror is working.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
I dont think this is anything to do with the G8 conference.
Why attack London when the conference is in Scotland?
It would have made far more sense to attack somewhere in Scotland (not necessarily the G8 venue) as this would show how close they could get to all the world leaders!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
As horrible as this attack was, i would not call it a successfull attack. I do think our current policies have made it more difficult for them to carry out thier attacks.
Dont know about the measures in America, but anybody could pretty much strap a bomb to themselves and get on a bus/train in England. No metal detectors, sniffer dogs or frisk searchings. All you'd have to do is wear a coat to conceal the bomb and your good-to-go
"Now TV's all about format these days isn't it, and I've got a new type for you right here.
Its me and Paris Hilton driving around in a car.... Now I know what you're thinking, but she's in the boot!"
"So you see, 'Ring around the Rosey' refers to the horrible symptoms of a terrifying disease, a disease which.....a disease which....ZIM! Theres a Pigeon on you're head. You have 'Head Pigeons'. get to the Nurse before they spread to the other children."
"Get off my lawn Cookie Beast!"
--Invader Zim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,920
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,920 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
Ok,ROY was there at Kings Cross today,but is fine!
He did help out the Ambulance service though,so he aint the total git he wants us to think he is!
That's our ROY. Bet he managed to grab some arses while he was at it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 9,769
cookie monster 7500+ posts
|
|
cookie monster 7500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 9,769 |
Quote:
Flameswordsman said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
As horrible as this attack was, i would not call it a successfull attack. I do think our current policies have made it more difficult for them to carry out thier attacks.
Dont know about the measures in America, but anybody could pretty much strap a bomb to themselves and get on a bus/train in England. No metal detectors, sniffer dogs or frisk searchings. All you'd have to do is wear a coat to conceal the bomb and your good-to-go
Its pretty much what we've got here, except now more buildings have concrete blockades in front of them. Unless you are trying to get into a court house or some other government building, there aren't really many saftey measures. And even in those cases, if you have the proper ID (which can probably be forged) you don't have to go through the metal detectors, etc., you enter through a separate entrance, flash your ID and be on your way, no problem.
But what are we to do, short of a complete lock down?
 Dear, sweet Harley Kwink...I'm madly in love with you. Marry me! We can go to Canadia. Or Boston or something. It'll be grand...You know the cookies are a given. They are ALWAYS a given. You could dump me tomorrow and you'd still get the cookies. Boston..shit, wherever dyke weddings were legalized. And where better to rub their little piggie noses in how bad they suck than right on their doorstep? What are they gonna do? Be jealous of you? Stare furiously at your tah-tahs? Not willingly give you cookies, but instead begrudgingly give you their cookies? Woman, time to wake up to the powers you wield - Uschi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956 |
Really dont know. A higher law enforcement presence or screenings before getting into train stations would have the whole World crying out about lack of freedom
Alternatively we could just leave things the way they are and have terrorists blow up something whenever they feel like it
"Now TV's all about format these days isn't it, and I've got a new type for you right here.
Its me and Paris Hilton driving around in a car.... Now I know what you're thinking, but she's in the boot!"
"So you see, 'Ring around the Rosey' refers to the horrible symptoms of a terrifying disease, a disease which.....a disease which....ZIM! Theres a Pigeon on you're head. You have 'Head Pigeons'. get to the Nurse before they spread to the other children."
"Get off my lawn Cookie Beast!"
--Invader Zim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 9,769
cookie monster 7500+ posts
|
|
cookie monster 7500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 9,769 |
Quote:
Flameswordsman said:
Really dont know. A higher law enforcement presence or screenings before getting into train stations would have the whole World crying out about lack of freedom
Alternatively we could just leave things the way they are and have terrorists blow up something whenever they feel like it
So, do you think there are really no choices then? I'm not being snarky, but I'm not sure you're being flip here. After 9/11 everyone who worked in the financial district (not sure about eveywhere else) had to stop at various check points in our devastated and broken city to show our IDs at various check points - and given what had just happened to my City, I was more than happy to provide my ID to the military checkpoints that were established - but on an everyday basis - I don't think that almost four years later that that would still be accepted. There are civil liberties to be considered. I can't imagine that Londoners don't feel something similar. If I'm wrong, Nowhereman and all our other Brits, tell me.
By the same token, if we leave everything "as is" are we inviting another attack bc. we seem lax in our vigilence?
Dear, sweet Harley Kwink...I'm madly in love with you. Marry me! We can go to Canadia. Or Boston or something. It'll be grand...You know the cookies are a given. They are ALWAYS a given. You could dump me tomorrow and you'd still get the cookies. Boston..shit, wherever dyke weddings were legalized. And where better to rub their little piggie noses in how bad they suck than right on their doorstep? What are they gonna do? Be jealous of you? Stare furiously at your tah-tahs? Not willingly give you cookies, but instead begrudgingly give you their cookies? Woman, time to wake up to the powers you wield - Uschi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,948
4000+ posts
|
|
4000+ posts
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,948 |
I was freaking out on Thursday night. My brother lives in London, and we couldn't get a hold of him on the phone. I finally got an e-mail last night letting me know he was okay, but for about 24 hours I was real tense.
Thing is- I can’t spell or type. I spell so badly my spell check doesn’t even know what I was trying to spell. And I have five Eisners HAHAHAHHA!!
-Brian Michael Bendis
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,618
Your death will make me king! 15000+ posts
|
|
Your death will make me king! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,618 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
From a pragmatic perspective: Someone who takes life for persoanl gain or fullfillment or out of malicious intent is very likely to reoffend. No one is safe from them as they could kill anyone at any time for any reason. However if someone kills someone simply to protect thier own life from another person they are unlikely to repeat the action unless thier life is similarly threatened or attacked. No one arround them is in danger from them save those who attack them.
We're talking about the act, not the person. Also, you're making a lot of assumptions that can't be proven on an individual basis.
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Now I get to ask you. Is it better to lay your life down to fulfill te bloodlust or profit motive of an attacker. It is the Is it morally supurior to stand idoly by as a madman slits the throats of your friends or family rather than "sinking to thier level" to stop them?
In your scenarios is killing the attacker the only other option? Some would argue that it never is. I'd say that in real life, having only two options is extremely rare.
But let's say it is the one and only option. Pragmatically, it's all in the numbers. Whichever solution results in fewer lives lost is the better. Unless you look at it with true objectivity. Then it doesn't really matter at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
|
|
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236 |
Any updates from London as far as tracking down the people responsible?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
|
|
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747 |
Quote:
Danny said:
I was freaking out on Thursday night. My brother lives in London, and we couldn't get a hold of him on the phone. I finally got an e-mail last night letting me know he was okay, but for about 24 hours I was real tense.
Glad to hear he's all right.
"Ah good. Now I'm on the internet clearly saying I like tranny cleavage. This shouldn't get me harassed at all." -- Lothar of the Hill People
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
The funny thing is I only just now realised this conversation wasn't w/ Wednesday.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
We're talking about the act, not the person. Also, you're making a lot of assumptions that can't be proven on an individual basis.
I'll try and follw you in circles, but forgive me if i get lost. We are not talking about just the act if we're discussing varying motives. Motives rest with the individual not with the act. And yes when discussing the pragmatic view I am making assuptions. This is done in the law all the time. People are sentenced based on "likelyhood to reoffend". No one knows for sure wether the perp will reoffend so they make educated assumptions. I think it's a good assumption that someone who kills for prophet or pleasure is more likely to reoffend than someone who kills in self defense.
Quote:
In your scenarios is killing the attacker the only other option? Some would argue that it never is.
Never? hmm. 
Quote:
But let's say it is the one and only option. Pragmatically, it's all in the numbers. Whichever solution results in fewer lives lost is the better. Unless you look at it with true objectivity. Then it doesn't really matter at all.
Based on that formula if there was a gang of four men who were going to kill three of your closest family members and htpothetically these men were so hell bent on killing your family that the only option was to kill them all it would be better to allow them to follow through because three deaths is better than four.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
Huh?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
Huh?
The implication being that my snide sarcastic remark was more cheraceritc of you than me........ I think.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,920
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,920 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
The funny thing is I only just now realised this conversation wasn't w/ Wednesday.
Oh, they all look the same to you, don't they?!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,524
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
|
|
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236 |
WHY AM I ALWAYS IGNORED IN THIS FORUM??????!!!!!!!!
GRRRRRRRRRRRR!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,305
kung-fu treachery 5000+ posts
|
|
kung-fu treachery 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,305 |
Whoa, who said that?
;P
PS: Glad you are alright Nowhereman.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
|
|
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342 |
This is just messed up. And it was so weird, because I had been making jokes about the 2012 Games to my friends. Creepy. Quote:
Nowhereman said:
I dont think this is anything to do with the G8 conference.
Why attack London when the conference is in Scotland?
It would have made far more sense to attack somewhere in Scotland (not necessarily the G8 venue) as this would show how close they could get to all the world leaders!
Because their goal was to induce terror into the population.
Attacking far-away and distant world leaders is all good and dandy...but what scares you more? The thought of an elected official being killed...or that fact that the bus you're riding to work in might blow up?
"You're either lying or stupid."
"I'm stupid! I'm stupid!"
Megatron and Starscream
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
The funny thing is I only just now realised this conversation wasn't w/ Wednesday.
Rack me? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Quote:
Im Not Mister Mxypltk said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:
theory9 said:
Anything that demonstrates terrorist mobility should be interpreted as a victory. Anything that disrupts the normal flow of life for civilians in any country threatened by terrorism should be interpreted as a victory. People are scared again. I'm curious to see what the UK and America do next.
The mayor of London doesn't think the terrorists were victorious.
Probably due in part to the fact that he's still alive.
Good point you're right. The terrorists are victorious! But then being no absolute right or wrong what does it really matter?
Rack Pariah
The funny thing is I only just now realised this conversation wasn't w/ Wednesday.
Oh, they all look the same to you, don't they?!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956 |
Quote:
harleykwin said:
Quote:
Flameswordsman said:
Really dont know. A higher law enforcement presence or screenings before getting into train stations would have the whole World crying out about lack of freedom
Alternatively we could just leave things the way they are and have terrorists blow up something whenever they feel like it
So, do you think there are really no choices then? I'm not being snarky, but I'm not sure you're being flip here. After 9/11 everyone who worked in the financial district (not sure about eveywhere else) had to stop at various check points in our devastated and broken city to show our IDs at various check points - and given what had just happened to my City, I was more than happy to provide my ID to the military checkpoints that were established - but on an everyday basis - I don't think that almost four years later that that would still be accepted. There are civil liberties to be considered. I can't imagine that Londoners don't feel something similar. If I'm wrong, Nowhereman and all our other Brits, tell me.
By the same token, if we leave everything "as is" are we inviting another attack bc. we seem lax in our vigilence?
I personally wouldnt be a big fan of blackades checking ID's, but imposing a counter-measure like this for only a month or so wouldnt seem to do much good considering the terrorists only strike now and again to make sure they're heard. Besides, the blockade would be mentioned in the papers and on TV, letting the terrorists still in the country make sure they dont go anywhere near the bloackade
Basically any counter-measure I can think of would have protesters complaining about "privacy issues" and what-not. Though I would feel a little pissed about being frisked all the time, i'd know it'll all be in vain because an organisation like Al Queda isnt stupid enough to get caught in such foolish ways
Could always put metal detectors [assuming bombs still need metal to function these days] on busses and trains, but it all comes back to politics again. Tony Blair wouldnt impose something like this because even though its a safety measure, it'd piss off the users of public transport and probably lose him the next election
"Now TV's all about format these days isn't it, and I've got a new type for you right here.
Its me and Paris Hilton driving around in a car.... Now I know what you're thinking, but she's in the boot!"
"So you see, 'Ring around the Rosey' refers to the horrible symptoms of a terrifying disease, a disease which.....a disease which....ZIM! Theres a Pigeon on you're head. You have 'Head Pigeons'. get to the Nurse before they spread to the other children."
"Get off my lawn Cookie Beast!"
--Invader Zim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
|
|
The Swizzler.... 6000+ posts
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,236 |
All politics aside, what would drive a person to do such a horrendous act? Was it Osama Ben Ladin or another terrorist group???
Better yet, when will American step up and help England sort through everything?!?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
Quote:
Cowgirl Jack said:
This is just messed up. And it was so weird, because I had been making jokes about the 2012 Games to my friends. Creepy.
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
I dont think this is anything to do with the G8 conference.
Why attack London when the conference is in Scotland?
It would have made far more sense to attack somewhere in Scotland (not necessarily the G8 venue) as this would show how close they could get to all the world leaders!
Because their goal was to induce terror into the population.
Attacking far-away and distant world leaders is all good and dandy...but what scares you more? The thought of an elected official being killed...or that fact that the bus you're riding to work in might blow up?
So as I say,what has it got to do with the G8 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,618
Your death will make me king! 15000+ posts
|
|
Your death will make me king! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,618 |
Staging a terrorist attack is the best way to take attention away from the conference. To that effect, an attack in Scotland wouldn't get near as much publicity as one in London. Plus, if it wasn't Al Quida, which wouldn't surprise me, bombing London makes it much easier to place blame on that particular group.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 956 |
OK, say your a terrorist, right? [im pointing fingers at no-one] Why would you blow shit up and then effectively let someone else take the credit?
I dont think it was Al Queida either, but isnt one of the main reasons of terrorism to get attention, like Al Queida preaching about thier religious beliefs and what-not?
"Now TV's all about format these days isn't it, and I've got a new type for you right here.
Its me and Paris Hilton driving around in a car.... Now I know what you're thinking, but she's in the boot!"
"So you see, 'Ring around the Rosey' refers to the horrible symptoms of a terrifying disease, a disease which.....a disease which....ZIM! Theres a Pigeon on you're head. You have 'Head Pigeons'. get to the Nurse before they spread to the other children."
"Get off my lawn Cookie Beast!"
--Invader Zim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Staging a terrorist attack is the best way to take attention away from the conference. To that effect, an attack in Scotland wouldn't get near as much publicity as one in London.
Yeah. Everyone hates us Scots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Staging a terrorist attack is the best way to take attention away from the conference. To that effect, an attack in Scotland wouldn't get near as much publicity as one in London. Plus, if it wasn't Al Quida, which wouldn't surprise me, bombing London makes it much easier to place blame on that particular group.
So you are saying that a bombing near a place where all the major world leaders are gathered wouldnt get anywhere near as much publicity?
I remember when the IRA bombed a hotel in Brighton during the 80s,it got massive media attention.
Why?
Cause the hotel was full of politicians.
Deaths or near deaths of politicians will always get more attention than that of the general public.
And why would they want to take attention away from a conference that could in effect,take away the third world debt?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188 |
Here's a little punditry to start the week. This article appeared in yesterday's SF Chronicle (all the gossip that's fit to print). It presents an analysis of and solution to terrorism different from the administrations. All you hawks should be satisfied since it does have a military component. Quote:
While our hearts go out to the victims of the terrorist bombings in London, our minds inevitably turn to one question: After nearly four years, why hasn't al Qaeda returned to attack America again?
There are two possible answers. One is that terror networks have been hit so hard by our military overseas and our defenses are so improved that they can't come back to prey upon our homeland. Another, more troubling possibility is that al Qaeda has deliberately chosen a strategy of striking elsewhere and that it will turn its sights on us when it is ready.
Both answers must be considered, but the first explanation falls apart quickly when we look at al Qaeda's actions in the past few years.
For example, in April 2003, the month after the United States invaded Iraq, al Qaeda mounted a major assault in Saudi Arabia. By August 2003, it had expanded its attacks into Iraq, where it still wages a vicious insurgency. Osama bin Laden's minions are still fighting in Afghanistan and have even gone after the Pakistani military ruler, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, coming close to assassinating him on a couple of occasions.
Beyond these major offensive moves, al Qaeda and its affiliates also have mounted substantial strikes in Spain, Tunisia, Turkey and Indonesia. Now they have attacked in Britain. And if official government statistics are to be relied upon, the number of significant terrorist attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, has skyrocketed to a total of 651 in 2004, according to the State Department. That's an all-time high, except for revised 2004 figures just put out by the National Counterterrorism Center, which puts the number at 3,192.
No, terror networks are not too crippled to continue to fight us and our allies. But perhaps they haven't come back to attack America because our defenses have become too good, sharply reducing their chances of success in any new terrorist venture.
This is not likely either. We do pay more attention now to patrolling our long, unfortified borders, and we have gotten better at protecting our vulnerable power and transportation infrastructures. Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants still arrive every year.
Our local transit and long-range rail systems remain at risk. And, despite the advance warning provided by earlier terrorist attempts to shoot down planes using shoulder-mounted missiles in Mombasa and Baghdad, airliners remain vulnerable to this form of attack.
Thus, it seems that the answer to our nagging question must be that al Qaeda has made a strategic choice not to bring the war back to America -- yet.
What does the logic behind such a decision look like? At the broadest level, taking the war elsewhere, as al Qaeda has, follows the concept of the indirect approach championed by the great British strategist B.H. Liddell Hart. This method consists of trying to knock away the props upon which even the strongest combatant must rely.
For example, if al Qaeda succeeded in toppling the Saudi government and replacing it with radical Islamists, they would have their finger on the oil pumps feeding the global economic pulse. Similarly, if Pakistan fell to the terrorists and their supporters, they would inherit an arsenal of nuclear weapons, upsetting the whole strategic calculus of the war.
Then there is Iraq, which seems to afford nothing but room to maneuver for al Qaeda. If U.S. troops were ever to leave, as everybody including President Bush wants them to, al Qaeda would claim credit for having driven us out. That would be a public relations bonanza for bin Laden. But if we stay, al Qaeda has a handy, easy-to-reach location for fighting Americans and sapping our will to continue the terror war.
In its March 11, 2004, attacks in Madrid, al Qaeda drove a powerful wedge between the Spanish people, who opposed the war in Iraq, and their pro-U.S. government, which fell from power after those strikes.
Now, threats have been made against Italy and Denmark, two other coalition members whose publics have opposed the war on Iraq.
It remains to be seen how the British public will respond to these latest attacks, but it seems clear that the terrorist choice of London as a target is yet another aspect of the indirect approach. For if staunch British support for the U.S. intervention in Iraq were to falter, our whole policy there might come undone.
So it seems that the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which many of us opposed beforehand, have become both our Achilles' heel and the single most important reason al Qaeda has chosen not to resume its terror campaign in America. Iraq provides our principal enemy with a place to fight us directly and a reason to mount an indirect campaign against our allies.
Some might now say that this makes our presence in Iraq worthwhile. As the president has put it, "We fight the terrorists in Iraq so that we do not have to face them at home."
Perhaps. Yet for a small fraction of what our involvement in Iraq has cost us in blood and treasure, we could have shored up our homeland defenses and made it well-nigh impossible for the terrorists to attack America again.
The rerouting of an even tinier fraction of these vast resources in support of a proactive campaign by small teams of special forces hunter networks would keep the terrorists perpetually on the run, unable even to think about coming back here or about striking elsewhere.
But we're still in Iraq, and we'll be there for years to come. Oddly, this probably means few, if any, attacks will be attempted on American territory. It also means there will be more Madrids and Londons. This should remind us that, in a war fought for all that we call civilization, feeling more assured about our own safety is hardly a sign that victory is near.
John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. His views do not represent official Defense Department policy.
The G-man says: You are GOOD
r3x29yz4a is my hero!
rex says I'm a commie, asshole, fag!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
|
|
Hip To Be Square 15000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 47,826 Likes: 8 |
After one line about the London bombings,its back to talking about America........how self absorbed can a person get?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,524
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,524 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
how self absorbed can a person get?
See: Omarion 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Quote:
Nowhereman said:
After one line about the London bombings,its back to talking about America........how self absorbed can a person get?
Agreed.
This thread is about London and the al Qaeda attack that occured there, not about the US.
And yes, it was an al Qaeda attack, made clear by the target. We like to think that politicians make the best targets, but they don't. When politicians are targeted, the people are more easily rallied to fight against the attacker. When civilians are targeted, it creates fear within the nation, because everyone realizes that no one is safe. Everyone is a target. So, instead of wanting to fight back, many people ask "why?" Sure, it didn't used to be that way, but we like to think of ourselves as an enlightened society, so we often ask the wrong questions. In Spain, this line of thinking led to choosing a government that would look the other way. It was a victory for al Qaeda. The question is, will it have the same effect in England, or do the English have the balls to fight back? I pray they do, because if al Qaeda wins another nation via terror attack, more will follow.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
