Terrorist attack on London

[philcommando 0]

Their reason:- The Western world kept us in poverty ( even though u and i are paying lots for oil...sheesh)

Their motivation:- get to f*k 72 virgins for eternity as promised in their written holy book

[DKM Jaguar 0]

How some people seem to come on a forum about such a tragic event while it is STILL being dealt with and seem to purposefully state views which were obviously going to stir up arguments in an already traumatic time is totally unbeleiveable.

There is no justification for what has been done, and there never will be.

How about stop trying to cause arguments for arguments sake, it's not big and it's not clever, it just makes people look like they are unable to grasp the fact that MANY people have and will die, MANY will loose or have lost limbs, and HUNDREDS of people have received burns which will scar them terribly for life.

So continue your little attention fest...

This is not aimed at anyone in particular.

[SpongeBob 0]

Why do Muslim terrorists always attack public transport? Israel, Madrid, now London. Its as if they want people to stop using public transport and ride in cars fueled by Arab oil.

[Pathy 0]

Well I'm not, there is no real justice at play here at all in terms of the victims.  I am just explaining the logical reasoning.  It's one thing to be right about the reality of things, and another to pretend there is real justice to this, or to shells killing civilians in Iraq, be that Coalition's or insurgent's.  Once you get into war, justice is out of the picture isn't it.

It was the catholic church which first introduced the idea of Just wars by the way, for the crusades.

Well thats fair enough, but theres a time and a place, and this, i don't think, isnt it, alot of people are quite upset by these attacks, and quite frankly its tasteless to be saying what you are about terrorist tactics being legitimate when people are grieving.

[bn880 5]

Well I know you have a point, so I'm certainly stopping as people are in kind of a shock after all this.

[Placebo 28]

Edit: For the rest of you, this thread isn't for flaming/arguing, this thread isn't for arguing the merits or not of a nation's military strategy, there are other threads for that, such as the war on terror, this thread is for one thing only, discussing the events of this morning's terrorist attacks on London.

I'll quote myself one time and one time only, the war on terror type discussion leaves this thread now. Else people will be post restricted.

[Placebo 28]

Opening: Stick to the discussion as I outlined above.

[meio_maluco 1]

thanks for opening,

I´ve been searching and searching cant find the website where they posted the claimings, they all say in the tvs reports where made, but i never find the websites.

Any of u guys know the links ?

[Pathy 0]

Was just speaking to my parents, they had just been on holiday, and one of the couples at the same villa, the husband is someone v high up in the fire service.

He told my dad that the public does not know just how protected they are, and that most of the "major" incidents that end up on his desk are terrorist related, not fire, most of which are nipped in the bud and never even make the news.

In short, i think we are lucky this is the 1st such incident related to Al-Queda, lucky that our security services are as good as they are.

[Akira 0]

thanks for opening,

I´ve been searching and searching cant find the website where they posted the claimings, they all say in the tvs reports where made, but i never find the websites.

Any of u guys know the links ?

I would think that linking those websites would violate the forum rules...especially if they have "videos" if you know what i mean. Course someone can PM you I suppose...

[cobra@pulse 0]

This is foucking crazy man, just heard the news on the way home. God damn mad

Looks like my local TA base will be tightening up security for tonight. Bastard terrorists.

[meio_maluco 1]

They had a website, that was hacked, maybe it wasnt theirs.

Though we "public" never know where they post their messages.

I read in the internet quote and quotes, also in Tv i wonder how they find the webpages :S

[Pathy 0]

To be honest they probably have a list of these type of websites and immediately an incident pops up keep checking them.

[Akira 0]

BBC TV just reported 33 dead, 45 critically injured, and 450 "causalties" confirmed. They have yet to list the dead from the bus yet...as I assume it may be hard to be sure.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Thank you to Placebo for keeping the discussion of this topic under control.

Well noone can fault those responsible for their deadly timing. With the EU presidency, having just won the hosting of the Olympics and also the G8 conference, London hasnt been such an obvious target for a while.

Balschoiw-

Quote[/b] ]Just have a look at yourself. People in London get killed and you want to retaliate with extreme violence and gore.

I dont, i dont know anyone personally who does, i havent heard any authorities in London or the UK speak any words to this effect and i havent seen angry crowds on the streets. People seem remarkably calm. This isnt another september the 11th (or even perhaps a Madrid), the long term psychological effect isnt yet clear but so far it frankly appears to be a cautious and saddened 'business as usual'.

Quote[/b] ]I guess it´s just natural that people in Afghanistan or Iraq feel the same way, keeping in mind how many of them actually got killed there.

Do you have any evidence that those responsible are from Afghainistan or Iraq (i would view it as rather unlikely). Do you have any evidence of the widespread involvement of Afghans or Iraqis in international terrorism generally? I do not believe that the assertion that Afghans or Iraqis are at the forefront of international terrorist attacks is borne out by the facts. I absolutely agree that its important to understand the motivation and ideology of those responsible, which is all the more reason to be careful that we get who and what they are right.

Quote[/b] ]The term "war on terrorism" is an incrompehensive and false term as this "war" cannot be won with military personel.

Yes absolutely. The military alone are never the answer to this type of problem (and should be used only in a limited capacity). I hope the guilty parties are arrested and brought to justice.

[theavonlady 2]

Read the bottom line: Italy and Denmark are next.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

thanks for opening,

I´ve been searching and searching cant find the website where they posted the claimings, they all say in the tvs reports where made, but i never find the websites.

Any of u guys know the links ?

Click to link to the BBC website's re-posting

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Quote (Placebo @ July 07 2005,15:51)

Edit: For the rest of you, this thread isn't for flaming/arguing, this thread isn't for arguing the merits or not of a nation's military strategy, there are other threads for that, such as the war on terror, this thread is for one thing only, discussing the events of this morning's terrorist attacks on London.

I'll quote myself one time and one time only, the war on terror type discussion leaves this thread now. Else people will be post restricted.

BBC jsut gave a lovely story about how one person got blown out of the train adn into the oncoming path of another train...

Lovely...

EDIT: BBC is showing footage also from a camera phone of people walking through the tunnels shortly after the explosion.

[bn880 5]

Sorry for going into politics here before, I didn't realize what the rules were in here.

[kakagoegie 0]

Can anybody tell me plz how many bombs have been exploded now and where? How many bombs in the metro and how many busses have been hit?

[Akira 0]

Can anybody tell me plz how many bombs have been exploded now and where? How many bombs in the metro and how many busses have been hit?

1 bus, 3 in the underground.

[meio_maluco 1]

about the news website i guess i would have to learn theyr language.

Thank for the links

[denoir 0]

Just got home and heard about the attacks. What can one say? I truly hope that they catch the bastards who did this.

That however sounds a bit hollow, doesn't it? Catching the specific fucks who did this isn't going to really change anything is it? This isn't even a question of a centralized terror network that you could bring down.

The problem here is a radical political and religious ideology that seems to suit a certain group of Muslims across the world.

This is not something that is solved by military invasions. We have to fight the ideology and its spread. This has to be done on several fronts:

1) Do not tolerate religious extremism. Imprison, silence or kill the ideological leaders. Do it in a nice way so it doesn't point at you.

2) Capture and kill the operational and political leaders of existing terrorist cells. Do it like the Germans handled the Red Brigades or the French handled the Algerian terrorists. It's not pretty, but it works - and in the end the body count is far smaller than for instance oh, I don't know.. invading another country.

The most important thing however is to remove the recruitment depot. You may not be able to entirely kill off an ideology, but you can reduce the number of supporters. The problem is that attacking an open society is very easy. It doesn't require much resources to attack civilians. So you really need to eliminate the supporters.

This can in theory be done in two ways. One is appeasement, saying "of course we respect your irrational religious fundamentalism", by giving financial aid (the appeal of joining terrorist organizations is directly connected to poverty), and of course by trying to not piss them off by..oh..say.. invading countries which they hold dear. The problem with that approach is that you have really removed the primary source of the problem: the religious fundamentalism. There was a time when Islam was far more rational and tolerant, but today the fact is that mainstream Islam is intolerant and fundamentalist. That doesn't mean that all Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers, but the line to cross is much closer.

The second possibility was expressed by the right-wing nut Ann Coulter after the WTC attacks: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity". While converting Islamic nuts to Christian nuts may not help much, the basic idea is a theoretical possibility. We (the west) could invade every single Muslim country, force a secular rule and ban the practice of Islam. Of course, not many sane people would support something like that on moral grounds. In addition, unless we nuked the whole Mid East or something, it would probably not be doable. Just look at the mess in Iraq and that's just one country which wasn't too fanatically religious to start with.

So it's a difficult problem. The first approach isn't a permanent solution. The step from irrational fundamentalist religious belief to irrational homicidal religious belief is not a big one. The core problem here after all is religion. The second solution is something most people would find appalling and unacceptable.

Honestly, I don't see a solution.

[Placebo 28]

I didn't realize what the rules were in here.

In a thread of this nature it's not so much about rules, it's about the fact that as Britain has been attacked and British people murdered the emotions of all British people are exceptionally raw right now, so in this thread everyone should be considerate of the feelings and mood of the British people and the British forum posters, same as would be observed if any nation had been attacked in this manner.

War on terror discussions can be discussed in the war on terror thread by all means.

[theavonlady 2]

Just got home and heard about the attacks. What can one say? I truly hope that they catch the bastards who did this.

That however sounds a bit hollow, doesn't it? Catching the specific fucks who did this isn't going to really change anything is it? This isn't even a question of a centralized terror network that you could bring down.

The problem here is a radical political and religious ideology that seems to suit a certain group of Muslims across the world.

This is not something that is solved by military invasions. We have to fight the ideology and its spread. This has to be done on several fronts:

1) Do not tolerate religious extremism. Imprison, silence or kill the ideological leaders. Do it in a nice way so it doesn't point at you.

2) Capture and kill the operational and political leaders of existing terrorist cells. Do it like the Germans handled the Red Brigades or the French handled the Algerian terrorists. It's not pretty, but it works - and in the end the body count is far smaller than for instance oh, I don't know.. invading another country.

The most important thing however is to remove the recruitment depot. You may not be able to entirely kill off an ideology, but you can reduce the number of supporters. The problem is that attacking an open society is very easy. It doesn't require much resources to attack civilians. So you really need to eliminate the supporters.

This can in theory be done in two ways. One is appeasement, saying "of course we respect your irrational religious fundamentalism", by giving financial aid (the appeal of joining terrorist organizations is directly connected to poverty), and of course by trying to not piss them off by..oh..say.. invading countries which they hold dear. The problem with that approach is that you have really removed the primary source of the problem: the religious fundamentalism. There was a time when Islam was far more rational and tolerant, but today the fact is that mainstream Islam is intolerant and fundamentalist. That doesn't mean that all Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers, but the line to cross is much closer.

The second possibility was expressed by the right-wing nut Ann Coulter after the WTC attacks: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity". While converting Islamic nuts to Christian nuts may not help much, the basic idea is a theoretical possibility. We (the west) could invade every single Muslim country, force a secular rule and ban the practice of Islam. Of course, not many sane people would support something like that on moral grounds. In addition, unless we nuked the whole Mid East or something, it would probably not be doable. Just look at the mess in Iraq and that's just one country which wasn't too fanatically religious to start with.

So it's a difficult problem. The first approach isn't a permanent solution. The step from irrational fundamentalist religious belief to irrational homicidal religious belief is not a big one. The core problem here after all is religion. The second solution is something most people would find appalling and unacceptable.

Honestly, I don't see a solution.

Wow! Are you sober, Denoir?

I meant that as a compliment.