Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal Em Emalb's Journal: Terrorism 62

Journal by Em Emalb

I think it may be time for if they take one of ours we take 100 of theirs.

I'm so sick of this "terrorism". It isn't. It's cowardism.

If I ever find out I have a terminal disease, I'll have to get me a nice sniper rifle and a ghillie suit.

Blam. Blam. Blam.

I hope England gets her dander up and retaliates.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Terrorism More

Terrorism

Comments Filter:
  • clearly we need to up the ratio until Islamic blood is pushed into the sea.

    Hey is that a Koran? BAM.
    • clearly we need to up the ratio until the infidels' blood is pushed into the sea.

      I can only hope you are attempting to mimic their mindset in an effort to combat that kind of thinking by showing how short sighted and destructive it is, right? No chance that you're simply as prone to blind hatred as they are, is there?
    • Nah- if we were at 1000 to 1 for the ~7000 dead we'd have had to kill 7 million people- and believe me, that would be noticed.
      • Funny DailyKOS has it 100000
        • They're counting the people we've killed as well. I'm talking about the people the terrorists have killed- the ~7000 is just a guess (~5000 on 9/11, our 1800+ soldiers we've lost in the War on Terror, and I'm throwing in a couple of hundred more for these 40 here, 10 there style attacks. There's definately a case for it being higher- say maybe 10,000 they've killed so far) We've killed maybe, maybe, 100,000 so far of theirs. We've got a long ways to go to get to a 1000 to 1 ratio. Nuking Mecca, Medina,
          • I am ready to suport your plan. Do you have a newsletter?
            • Not currently. And my real prefered plan would be to close the borders, institute strict fossil fuel and energy rationing, and simply kill off anybody who appears suspicious at the border...would solve a lot of problems out here on the west coast where Islamic Terrorists don't come anywhere close to the damage done by Mexican Meth Adicts.
              • perhaps we could simply kill them both? I mean I'm just throwing spaghetti against the wall here...
                • perhaps we could simply kill them both? I mean I'm just throwing spaghetti against the wall here...

                  There ain't nothing simple in this- we don't have the manpower right now to seal our borders. Doing so would require actually pushing the unemployment rate to 0%- something that American Corporatins will never put up with. But yes- that would be the ideal solution- seal the borders, kill anybody who tries to cross illegally, or whose papers appear suspicious (all 19 of the hijackers had errors on their for
            • Mainly due to the rather low population density in the deserts of the middle east- it'd be like trying to kill 7 million people in the Pacific Northwest- you can do it but you'd have to nuke every single major city to get that many, and then drive hundreds of miles killing individual people to finish it off.

            Hey, fuck you!

            Just nuke Bellevue*, Tacoma, Kirkland, and Redmond. :)

            *Umm, not during business hours since you'd likely end up killing 1/3rd of Seattlites...

            You know I think we can do without Olymp

            • Nope- from the 2003 estimate [census.gov] you could kill every single person in the entire state of Washington- and you'd still be 800,000 people shy of 7 million. Given the 4% change over the previous three years- next year you could kill every person in Washington state, and still be 623,297 people shy of 7 million. Even with a majority of those being urban citizens- you'd still be driving hundreds of miles around the state as well as around Oregon and Idaho, looking for people to kill to meet a 7 million quota.

              A s
  • Is that we're going to be reading a whole bunch of "This is all Bush's fault" screeds shortly.

    Also expect the round of "Muslim sensitivity training" to start up again too.
    • As of right now, this is about the loss of life, not some US bashing.

      I don't think any sane person thinks that they'll spin this as an American problem.

      My thoughts go out to those folks on the Island who lost family and friends.

      Fuckin coward "terrorists".
      • George Galloway has already stepped forward.

        1513 Respect MP George Galloway says: "We argued, as did the security services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the Government ignoring such warnings."

        link [guardian.co.uk]
    • Is that we're going to be reading a whole bunch of "This is all Bush's fault" screeds shortly.

      That [slashdot.org] didn't take long. :-P

    • Does Prescott Bush count? I blame him for arming the Wahhabists in the first place when this all really started- in the 1920s and 1930s right after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

      His grandson and great-grandson are just dealing with their family's guilt in the best way they know how- doesn't matter that it isn't very competent, unless you have a time machine there's no peacefull way to solve this mess.
      • Do you want to go back and blame the Popes for the crusades too? Maybe we can dig back even further just for fun.

        You blame whoever you damn well please. Me? I'm gonna blame the homicidal maniacs who claim their "religion" allows them to deliberately target and blow-up children.
        • Do you want to go back and blame the Popes for the crusades too?

          Uh- yes- that's why JPII appologised for them. Though I must admit, an objective reading of history does not exactly leave the Islamics or the Eastern Orthodox blameless in that one either- after all, local Roman Catholics in the middle east had been appealing to Rome for two centuries for military intervention by the time of the first Crusade.

          You blame whoever you damn well please. Me? I'm gonna blame the homicidal maniacs who claim their
          • As part of the "justification" for the Madrid bombings the grievances included driving the Muslims out of Andalusia. IIRC this was long before anyone was really thinking about oil as a tradable commodity.

            You quest for "root causes" seems to halt conveniently at the perpetrator that you wish to blame.
            • I was actually completely unaware of that. Thanks for pointing it out- this needs more of a rethink....where was Andalusia? Someplace on the Spainish mainland?
              • Yes, Andalusia (Andalucía por los gente que hablan Espanol) is part of Southern Spain and part of the original Muslim empire stretching through Africa and into Europe.

                Touristy info here: http://www.andalucia.org/modulos.php?modulo=Index& fichero=index_idi&idioma=eng [andalucia.org]
                • "Original Muslim Empire", I'd point out, was only Mecca and Medina- it was only after Mohammed's death that the original Sunni and Shia took it further than that. There WERE peoples and kingdoms in all of those areas before that.

                  Calling it an Orignal Empire is kind of like calling the United States the original North American nation- economically accurate, in order of revolutions somewhat accurate, but totally ignoring the six nations that were here before.
                  • We're not the Original United States.

                    We're United States Classic! :-D

                    As for the kingdoms before the Caliphate tell that to the Muslims who were complaining that the lose of Andolucia was a justification for the Madrid attacks. (They weren't first, they weren't last, and they had no unique claim to the land.)
                    • We're United States Classic! :-D

                      Does that make the neo* dictatorships of Clinton and the Bush Dynasty the New United States (I seem to remember a bunch of stuff from all three administrations on "The New World Order")?

                      If so, much as I hated it in my teenage liberal days, give me back the United States Classic of Carter & Reagan.
  • is the historical usage for anarchy was to get the attention of the (percieved) offending party and then state the changes that are being demanded.

    Have there ever been any demands for change? Did I just miss them?

    If there haven't been demands for change, what is the purpose of these mindless violent acts?

    ^_^

    • Sure, there have been demands. They demand that we stop being so filthy rich and immediately join them in their woman-demeaning, hatred-filled, backwards lifestyle so they don't feel so lonely.

      Personally, I think they feel lonely because they're too busy demeaning their women.
    • If there haven't been demands for change, what is the purpose of these mindless violent acts?

      Same as slowly sawing the head off of innocents. To instill fear in others.

      If they had a purpose other than terror they would use more efficient means and select targets other that Joe Sixpack commuting to work. But, there are few things that'll scare people more than letting them know that they are not safe anywhere. Beslan proved that that our kids aren't safe from harm either.

      Unfortunately, the tactic works to

      • Actually Bin Laden's group has made some specific demands, removing US troops from Saudi soil was one of them. (I don't remember the rest and I don't have a link at the moment, sorry)

        As for Beslan that was more about Chechenia than anything else.
        • Do you think that if we appeased them, and gave them 100% of what they have demanded that they would put down thier weapons amd join us in making S'mores?
          • Depends on the group ... there are a lot of predominantly muslim terror/insurgent/resistance groups around the world all with different beefs and goals (Beslan vs. whomever bombed London today).

            Some may be the sort of thing that can be dealt with like the IRA was and some will need to be taken out or rendered ineffective with a combination of inteligence/law-enforcement/military action (though more special forces type surgical strikes than large scale action). Most of the various Al Quada splinters will l
            • I rather doubt there are any locally based insurgents left in Iraq- and giving in to their demands would only produce more acts of terror and more demands. We're 100 years late for appeasement- Prescott Bush burnt that bridge for us back in the 1930s.
              • I rather doubt there are any locally based insurgents left in Iraq- and giving in to their demands would only produce more acts of terror and more demands. We're 100 years late for appeasement- Prescott Bush burnt that bridge for us back in the 1930s.

                I think you've got that backwards. I'd say a majority of the insurgent activity is the locals.

                Insurgents don't have the sort of success they are having in Iraq without a lot of quiet support from the population.

                I think setting some sort of roadmap for turni
                • I think you've got that backwards. I'd say a majority of the insurgent activity is the locals.

                  Hate to be Clintonesque about this, but it depends on the meaning of the word "locals".

                  Insurgents don't have the sort of success they are having in Iraq without a lot of quiet support from the population.

                  And of course "support". The kind of support insurgents need can be provided by anybody within a 250 mile radius if there is enough gas for the car bomb- that could mean insurgents based in Iran, Lebanon,
                  • Hate to be Clintonesque about this, but it depends on the meaning of the word "locals".

                    Locals in this case mean Iraqis, usually from the same town or region.

                    And of course "support". The kind of support insurgents need can be provided by anybody within a 250 mile radius if there is enough gas for the car bomb- that could mean insurgents based in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia could have this kind of success rather easily.

                    Support means a hell of a lot more than that. The population is cl
                    • Locals in this case mean Iraqis, usually from the same town or region.

                      In that case- that group was long ago beat and any of them that aren't currently in jail are training WITH our troops to become the home grown replacements.

                      Support means a hell of a lot more than that. The population is clearly assisting the insurgents otherwise they wouldn't have nearly as good intelligence as they do or nearly as easy a time disappearing into the local population.

                      How hard do you think it would be to do that for sa
  • London has more cameras on the street than anywhere else in the world. They said they expected to start seeing video of the terrorist surfacing as the authorities dig through the archives. That could make for some interesting discoveries.
    • They said they expected to start seeing video of the terrorist surfacing as the authorities dig through the archives.

      Let's hope not. It'll be used as justification to turn the UK into even more of a big brother state than it is now. Yes, all the cameras have some useful benefits, as in cases like this. But not enough to justify the intrusive nature of their presence IMHO.

      • If they find them on the tapes it will justify more cameras because what they have works but can work better.

        If they don't find them on the tapes then it will justify more cameras because what they have doesn't work as well as it should.

        Watching this unfold will be like watching a train wreck.
    • So these guys didn't die for Allah?

      Interesting. Guess their goal wasn't 24352385697846598659875 virgins.

      Honestly, I don't get it. What's with the virgins? I'd rather have an experienced woman. :)
  • Who's "they"? Are there even that many of "them"?

    Some unrelated statistics that don't have much to do with this at all:

    Casualties of the Conflict in Iraq since 2003 [wikipedia.org]

    Counts of civilian deaths specifically documented range from 22,787 to 25,814. A study in the Lancet estimated 100,000 deaths from all causes as of October, 2004, with roughly three times as many injured. This has been disputed.
    ...
    Although there are no accurate counts of dead Iraqi soldiers, and U.S. Central Command has made few stateme
    • Who gets 'credit' for friendly fire kills?
      • Hmm.

        Who... Who... Who...

        I know!

        Wait...

        Are you saying that President Bush planted the four bombs in London? Whoa, dude.:D
        • I had a tinfoil hat moment while driving home from work. Upon first hearing of the British 'rally round the flag' response, I was thinking 'what better way to get a member of the "coalition of the willing" back into the fold then by drumming up a terrorist attack with, honestly, somewhat modest casualities.' (Not belittling any losses, but relative to some terrorist attacks, this had few deaths.)

          • Has something like that ever been proven to actually have happened? Where a western government intentionally killed its citizens to drum up support for a cause?

            It just seems like such a common theory that I have to wonder if it has any basis outside of fiction.

    • Them would be, at this point, any Islamic who has signed on for the general Jihad against the west. Last I saw, there were estimates that placed these fanatical sects as high as 10% of all Moslems. There are over a billion Moslems in the world- which would indicate we've got about 100 million people to either kill or put in jail before the suicide bombs stop. Plenty for the 700,000 that this JE would kill- even enough for the 7,000,000 that my rough estimate combined with the suggestion previously in the
  • If anyone knew how to find 100 of theirs, that 100 would have already been .. uh .. confronted.
    • We shipped out about a hundred people named bin Laden to France in the 48 hours after 9-11. If we were going to do this, it wouldn't be that hard to find the families of prominent terrorists to kill one a day until the terrorist surrendered.

      But of course, that would make us the terrorists, some say. But I'm hard pressed to find any revolution where the revolutionaries didn't end up as bad as the people they were revolting against.
  • I wonder if Blair and Bush started calling it 'cowardism' instead of 'terrorism' if it would catch on. It would certainly curb the 'fear' that the word 'terrorism' portrays. Honestly I'm not scared by terrorism...I will die someday and I have to accept that...if it's to a dumb @#$ and his exploding body suit or to cancer it's all the same to me, but using the word 'terrorism' does exactly what the attacker intends...spreads fear...who's afraid of a 'coward'? Not many...call it what it is. GOOD JE BTW
    • For the most part I agree with you, that anything we can do to dilute the fear that they cause is an excellent way to counter their tactics. But I've also gotta side with Bill Maher(sp?): any act that involves your own death can be rightly called a lot of mean, nasty things, but 'cowardly' just isn't one of them.

      I guess 'homicidal superstitious fucktards' isn't likely to catch on, is it?
      • And once again, Bill Maher is wrong. It doesn't get much more cowardly than suicide. You're so chicken shit to face tomorrow that you don't bother. Further, consider that if engaged in a jihad, you'll get bj's from a billion sacred goats or whatever else, and your family will be taken care of both now and in the afterlife as well. If you are a true believer, there is no risk.

        With that sort of certainty, Maher could only make that comment if he had NO knowledge about the nature of faith.
    • I remember that book- it was one of Isaac Asimov's Foundation series. Hari Seldon suggested it to the Emperor- but they called it idiocy. Any suicide bomber had his name wiped from human records- and replaced with the word "Idiot" and a number....including on his dishonorable tombstone.
  • my response elsewhere [slashdot.org]

    My heart goes out to Londoners, but to defeat your enemy you either have to eradicate or understand them. We don't have the balls for the first option and our leadership lakes the compassion (or brains) for the second. It's a touchy situation that I can admit: I don't have the answer for.

    -Ab

  • I hope England gets her dander up and retaliates.

    Not a chance. In this country, and particularly in London, we've seen quite a few bombs and the like over the last 20 years or so. To be honest I suspect the best response to the terrorists is just to say "fuck you", and go about as if nothing had happened. What they want is for us to be cowed and terrified, and we're just not going to give them the satisfaction. They want to force us into a kneejerk over-reation, and I don't think we'll do that. Finally

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Close