Terror attack in Manchester...

[Gorgon]

Although this is genuinely terrifying, the amount of people who get hurt or killed by terrorist attacks is really quite minuscule. As they say, doing nothing is the same as doing something. The dispassionate analysis really calls for doing nothing that is not already being done.

[Chilloutman]

Although this is genuinely terrifying, the amount of people who get hurt or killed by terrorist attacks is really quite minuscule. As they say, doing nothing is the same as doing something. The dispassionate analysis really calls for doing nothing that is not already being done.

no-one ever observed how it can end if 'we do nothing' because in the end, other side will loose interest in 'soft' solution and get right into 'final' ones

[Gorgon]

I reiterate : the dispassionate analysis.

[redneckdevil]

Although this is genuinely terrifying, the amount of people who get hurt or killed by terrorist attacks is really quite minuscule. As they say, doing nothing is the same as doing something. The dispassionate analysis really calls for doing nothing that is not already being done.

I agree but then wouldn't the ones who have this placed upon them be miniscule as well?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Although this is genuinely terrifying, the amount of people who get hurt or killed by terrorist attacks is really quite minuscule. As they say, doing nothing is the same as doing something. The dispassionate analysis really calls for doing nothing that is not already being done.

 

 

Go say that in the face of those two Polish girls who lost their parents. Go and say their parents were minuscule.

2/38566454 = 5.18585401e-8 Parents as part of Polands population

2/((38566454/100000)*.7) = 0.00740836286 Parents as part of murders in Poland.

 

Their parents were miniscule. You easily triggered reprobates are like those liberals who cry over mass shooting sob stories.

[Meshugger]

If you want to remove Islamic terrorism, then just deport all muslims. Then deal with with your own terrorism.

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

If you want to remove Islamic terrorism, then just deport all muslims. Then deal with with your own terrorism.

Or you could shut down the Saudis and Israel.

[Hurlshort]

I'm just surprised how quickly people are willing to give up rights. Whenever we have a mass shooting, liberals freak out and want to ban guns, whenever we have terrorism, conservatives freak out and want to ban Muslims. Two ships passing in the night.

[Gorgon]

If you want to remove Islamic terrorism, then just deport all muslims. Then deal with with your own terrorism.

 

 

'Hello sir, are you a muslim ? You know the ones we are deporting en masse rigth now. No you say, well carry on then'

[Blarghagh]

What symbol do we use to mark them before deportation? Star of David's been done. I'm sure the camps they'll stay in before being deported will have effective showering facilities.

[Darkpriest]

I reiterate : the dispassionate analysis.

 

yeah the thing is, you would not have to worry about this. ou wold not have to worry when going to a concert, when shopping, when clubbing, etc. Just look 20-30 years back at German republic (the western one) and compare crime rates, security level, and incidents there. check the same for France and UK, and even Sweden.

 

Why should I accept something, that could have been easily avoided?

[Gorgon]

It could not. All it really takes is the will to carry out an attack. Sooner or later one will succeed in avoiding detection. 

[Hurlshort]

 

Why should I accept something, that could have been easily avoided?

 

 

Easily avoided? How so?

[Darkpriest]

 

There is a difference, and a significant one at that. For example I do not condemn such bomb attacks if they are aimed at non-civilian targets (i.e. military and political) and are done against targets who took your land and freedom away. You can argue if given organizations have legitimate causes and their real intentions though. Otherwise you'd have to condemn various independence movements / paramilitary organization throughout the history - including US independence, WW1 and WW2. It's a part of the asymetrical warfare.

 

However I do have a huge problem with target being painted on civilian populace to terrorize it and cause as much damage as possible with the goal of eradication of everyone who does not share your point of view and religious beliefs.

 

That's why motivation is a great difference, and why the domestic EU 'terror' was a much different beast than what we are facing from the wave of Islamic terrorizm.

 

I've no interest in getting into a debate of value judgments here -- the thing with violence is that it doesn't determine who is right, only who is left. I'm just pointing out, based on actual examples, that the differences you see aren't such.

 

These IS-"inspired" attackers target the populace at large because they don't see themselves as part of that populace, but that distinction is completely arbitrary, much like Basque freedom fighters not considering themselves Spanish. They prioritised high value political and military targets over plain citizens because they thought that was the most expedient way to accomplish their goals, namely the destabilization of the state, not out of any sense of honor or whatever else you're thinking. Proof of this is that they did not hesitate to murder any civilians that got in their way, and showed no regard for collateral damage. Again, this is when not directly targeting civilians.

 

Sorry, I'm just not seeing it.

 

 

The difference between those is even though there were collateral casualties, those people were not prime targets. When you are fighting for independence, you do not want to target the local populace, because then you get no support for your actions.

 

Do you think that there were no collateral deaths during any uprising / fight for independence / against an occupant? there always were, it's a part of a warfare, that collateral damage is there. The only way to avoid it, is to have your wishes granted in a peaceful manner, the problem is, the other side not always wants to co-operate, and lose their influence

 

Ideally yes, such means should not be used, but I can understand those measures if you don't get it via political and peaceful means and the military power is hugely asymmetrical.

 

Even that incident that you quoted, it is still disputed that it could have been avoided, as the warning call was made, and it is possible that it was negligence on the police part.

 

The moment your primary target is not the politicians and agents of governmental power arm, and you shift it to civilian populace, you lose any credibility and should be hunted down and removed with any support base you got.

 

The muslim attacks on western societies is not a freedom fight, it's a fight to remove rights or even outright erradicate the individuals who do now want to bow down to a certain set of religious beliefs.

 

Why should I suddenly accept such reality near me? Why would I agree to importing more of the potential trouble?

[Darkpriest]

 

 

Why should I accept something, that could have been easily avoided?

 

 

Easily avoided? How so?

 

 

By better screening and harsh immigration rules for people out of our cultural circle? Does Japan have issues?

[Gorgon]

How do you define that exactly. Does not sound easy at all. 

[Darkpriest]

How do you define that exactly. Does not sound easy at all. 

 

Easy, university education - tested, check on the work experience where applicable, knowledge of the language - tested, money of at least 20k EUR/USD or a bank guarantee for this amount. Does not get right to import other members of the family until 5 year probation is done and the person is working in an average pay salary area with no long gaps of unregistered work/unemployment (3+months).

 

EZ - we have enough bumps to cover minimum wage jobs.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Darkpriest

[Malcador]

Might be a good idea to have those for people in your cultural circle.

 

Isn't it very tedious to immigrate into the US anyway? Certainly wasn't easy in Canada.

[Hurlshort]

The collateral damage argument versus terrorism is an interesting one, because we have our militaries actively engaged in many Muslim countries. It's pretty clear terrorists are justifying their acts based on the collateral damage that is happening there.

[Darkpriest]

The collateral damage argument versus terrorism is an interesting one, because we have our militaries actively engaged in many Muslim countries. It's pretty clear terrorists are justifying their acts based on the collateral damage that is happening there.

 

yeah, the problem is, why are we even there in the first place?

Edited May 26, 2017 by Darkpriest

[Wrath of Dagon]

The first step in combating terrorism is facing reality. Declare Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization and take down their vast infrastructure in the US: https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2017/05/25/state-department-says-muslim-brotherhood-terror-cell-hassm-threatens-u-s-embassy-in-cairo/

[Hurlshort]

Is the KKK a designated terrorist organization?

[Malcador]

Hasn't it been one since the 90s? The Jamaat I mean.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Malcador

[Wrath of Dagon]

Is the KKK a designated terrorist organization?

I think it has to be foreign for that designation. And what was the last terrorist act KKK committed?

 

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/868053426705444864

lol

[HoonDing]

Time is a circle

 

The Red Summer

During the summer of 1919, over 20 riots took place, the largest being in Washington, D.C., Chicago, Omaha, Knoxville, Tennessee, and Charleston, South Carolina. The Washington riot was the most significant and historically ground-breaking of any of the riots. Washington newspapers had published headlines during the month of July about sex crimes against white women committed by an unknown black perpetrator. The NAACP appealed directly to the papers to stop the printing of the articles because they were likely to begin violent race riots. Within a couple of days of their appeal, a riot began. 400 whites began rioting against blacks in Washington for the crimes committed by the so-called “Negro Fiend”. At first there was very little black resistance, but when police came to break it up, they arrested more blacks than whites. The violence didn’t stop then, however, but it continued for four days, and resulted in the death of 9 people from street beatings and the death of 30 others from fatal wounds. During the four day riot, over 150 people were clubbed, beaten, or shot by mobs of both races. This particular riot is significant because never before had there been such a large retaliatory group of armed blacks. This foreshadowed events to come in the Civil Rights Movement.

The Tulsa Riot

The Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 has been called "one of the most vicious and intense race riots in American history,” and it was all started by one woman: Sarah Page. Sarah Page reported that while she was in an elevator in the Drexel Building in Tulsa, Oklahoma she was assaulted by a 19-year-old black man named **** Rowland. Nobody questioned the accusation, and the story was published by the Tulsa Tribune on June 1st, the following day. After the article was published there was widespread talk among the whites of lynching Rowland that night. The colored community, fearing for Rowland’s safety, went to the jail 75 strong armed and ready to fight off a white mob. The Sheriff came to the jail and told the crowd that Rowland would be safe and protected. Just as the blacks were about to leave, a white man tried to disarm one of them, and a shot was fired. After this, as the Sheriff later reported, “All hell broke loose.” The fighting continued until midnight when the blacks were forced back to their section of town. Twelve men were found to be dead, ten white, two black. The next day, a mob of 10,000 whites attacked the colored community using bombs, machines guns, and even airplanes. The mob brought in oil and set aflame the houses of the black community, while the blacks fought in vain for their survival. After the riot subsided, the death toll was 50 whites and 150 to 200 blacks. It was later found that Rowland was completely innocent; he had actually stepped on Sarah Page’s foot by mistake. Nobody considered why he would assault her in a public elevator in a public building within calling distance of many other white people, but instead they turned straight to violence.