News Bombs in London

  • Thread starter Art
  • Start date

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,847
17
Firstly, the comment you first quoted was aimed at the original 'invasion' had nothing to do with 'liberation' but illusive WMD
Fine. I'll take this as a retraction of your suggestion that the number of civilian casualties has any bearing on whether it is appropriate to call it a 'liberation'.


secondly the inability of many american soldiers to distinguish who the enemy is has resulted in many non-combatives dead. This has nothing to do with the iraqi people directly and everything to do with the enforcement of western policies.
And the fact that insurgents often masquerade as non-combatives would have nothing to do with the "inability of many American soldiers to distinguish who the enemy is".

But you make it sound like this is a primary cause of civilian casualties; I would be greatly surprised if the number of Iraqis killed because an American thought he was a combatant did not pale into comparison to the number of Iraqis killed as a result of insurgent activities, even if you disregard civilian police forces!

And, of course, there would be far fewer Iraqi civilians killed in actions against the insurgents if, y'know, insurgents didn't operate in civilian areas.


U.S. = murder capital of the world
Hurray for parroting sound-bytes! :rofl:

The U.S. doesn't even show up on the list: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap [Broken]

Unless you look at total murders, which biases against countries with large populations... in which case the U.S. still isn't even at the top: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur [Broken]

More lists: http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html


That's beside the point. If say, China had invaded Britain, home defence stratergies would include small groups of military and civilians blowing them up left, right and center, poisoning water supplies, sabotaging equipment etc, etc.
And if, for example, the British insurgency poisoned the water supplies used by the general public, I would condemn that act.

Are you willing to condemn actions taken by the insurgency? Or are you going to give them a carte blanche simply because you don't like the fact the coalition invaded?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

russ_watters

Mentor
18,643
4,876
Burnsys said:
Ok russ go to ubekistan and try a little of the American WAY OF LIFE!
:confused: :confused: Huh? Uzbekistan? What does that have to do with the fact that Al Qaeda wants to destroy the American way of life in the US, and more generally, the western way of life everywhere?
 
Last edited:
russ_watters said:
:confused: :confused: Huh? Uzbekistan? What does that have to do with the fact that Al Qaeda wants to destroy the American way of life in the US, and more generally, the western way of life everywhere?
Exactly russ, america proyects a very very diferent "Way of life" on foreing countrys , They say they embrace freedom, but then bush and rumsfeld go to ubekistan (just to show 1 example) and give weapons and aid to a dictator who is against fredom of the press agains any kind of freedom who kill disent and boils people alive.. then they take pictures togheter.
So tell me, what way of life does an ubekistan citizen sees?? they see they have a dictator, they have no fredom, and they se amercia as the one who help their opresor, where do you think ubekistan dictator get the resources it need to keep it people enslaved???? What could the people of ubekistan think about the american way of life...
 
russ_watters said:
Getting warmer...

....ahh, yes, I did post it earlier in this thread. How soon we forget: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html

Paraphrasing, he wants us to:

1. Embrace Islam
2. Give up our way of life (embracing Islam would also require that).
3. Examine ourselves honestly (the way he does :rolleyes: )
4. Stop supporting anyone who opposes forces that are Islamic, anywhere. that includes Israel, Russia (against the Chechens), Manilla, etc.
5. "...get out of our lands."
6. Do not interfere with our internal politics. (he doesn't specify who "our" is)
7. Treat us as equals. (again, he doesn't specify who "us" is)

And if we don't comply: That means killing all who don't comply. This isn't simply a fight against the US government, our way of life itself is the enemy of Bin Laden.
Russ,

I am sure you believe what you just 'paraphrased' however your letter is from 2002.

The letter I quoted to you about bankrupting the USA was from 2 years later and actually states that he wants to bankrupt the USA. (October 29, 2004)

No matter what he said in 2002, his agenda seems to have changed so your 'correction' of me and the other poster is wrong.

He does state bankruptcy is his goal and that the Bush administration is helping him in this matter.

I suggest you read the letter contained in this link and update your information.

Bin Ladens words start on page 3 and runs through page 8.

:biggrin:
 
78
0
not only wars in afghanistan and iraq are bancrupting USA, but "our way of life" is simply not sustainable in the long run.
we fight some phony wars with evil moslems, while 2 or 3 nations on earth are getting stronger, and all this terror stuff is just a smoke screen.
 
210
0
The U.S. doesn't even show up on the list: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap [Broken]

Unless you look at total murders, which biases against countries with large populations... in which case the U.S. still isn't even at the top: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur [Broken]

More lists: http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html
dont buy that one bit... According to that list canada has a higher murder rate / person then USA, also Greece does and Finland... come on Finland???? They may have a higher than normal suicide rate, but Finish people arent gun tooting gangsters..

It doesnt take into account Iraq, where people are getting murder in 10-100 daily right now
 
Last edited by a moderator:
36
0
Are you willing to condemn actions taken by the insurgency? Or are you going to give them a carte blanche simply because you don't like the fact the coalition invaded?
Neither, there is something going on that I cannot see. If I was to take things at face value then yes the insurgents have a right to defend their country against what they see as invaders using whatever tactics they have available to them.

Also the conduct and stratergies employed by the American forces is something I cannot fathom. I have been in the British Army, I have studied tactics and I cannot for the life of me understand any of the tactics the Americans used. If I was to take it at face value I would say the American commanders are sending their troops into places without any thought to the condition of the troops.

So I say again 'there is something going on that I cannot see'.

Also ref:
And the fact that insurgents often masquerade as non-combatives would have nothing to do with the "inability of many American soldiers to distinguish who the enemy is".
Strategy. As a result of donning civilian clothing the insurgents have goaded the Americans into shooting lots and lots of civilians which not only anger a lot of people but provide fuel for insurgent recrutment. So it's a win-win for them.

We had the same problem with the IRA and you didn't see us mowing down civilians just in case they were IRA now did we?

Oh, and by the way, it was the American people who were the biggest financial supporters of the I.R.A. People who paid to get British civilians in the streets of London murdered. So you have no right to stand on any moral high ground (America as a whole. I don't know you personally), the people of your country have supported terrorism in the past and, if we were to follow modern docterine we would have a right to invade America. And since you all have the right to bare arms you would all be potential combatants and thus targets.

This obviously the wrong thing to do. Just as it is wrong to invade any country because we believe they have terrorists there. There has to be another way.
 
Anttech said:
El Hombre Invisible, with your reasoning you would conclude that there is no hope... I think there is, Islam aint all bad, really... I do believe that there will be an uprising inside Islam which is anti-terror, these people will quash this barbaric behavior... But for these people to actually be listened to we (the west) need to pull out of the ME, and stop medeling Costra Nostra style, each to mind there own buisness... If this happens then Peace loving Muslums will not have a counter arguement to removing the radicals from their people
It's not a case of Islam being all that bad any more than, with the IRA, Catholicism being all that bad. I don't know what it would take to end this. That's the worry. It has to end some time, I'm sure. Let's keep an eye on the Israel-Palestine problem. Here, people seem inclined to become suicide bombers regardless of the progress of the peace process, suggesting again that politics and even the Palestine cause (i.e. to have a Palestinian state) is not always the raison d'etre of such actions. I wonder here, too, what it will take to stop the killing. People put plans in place, announce ceasefires, then some psycho takes it upon himself to strap a bomb on his back, run over the border and take out as many people as he possibly can. Why? Because of past attrocities by the other side. Revenge (or honour, as it is no doubt called) seems more important than peace or progress. So then more housing areas are demolished, then more suicide bombers arrive, then another ceasefire, then another lone nut... and on and on it goes. Hopefully we'll one day just run out of nutters. But really, we simply have two neighbouring sets of people who hate each other's guts , and this hatred is prone with certain extremist types to manifest itself in violence, so even if peace is officially announced, I doubt that would be the end of it.

But as for us... I don't mean to be a pessimist, but I just don't have faith in these people being rational enough to meet any action on our part with a reappraisal of their methods. But yes, I guess the first step is for a culture intolerant of terrorism in the Middle East to emerge and, like you said, for that we need to perhaps make ourselves more inconspicuous. Another might be for mainly Islamic countries to fix on an agreed interpretation of the Koran, one that doesn't involve bloodshed at any opportunity, and drill this into its people from a very early age, include a distrust of fundementalist extremists... we could all do with reminders to beware false prophets. Objective media and open debate would be a necessity, since such institutions in the west are a large contributor to moderate thinking and give people a voice that doesn't just say: "Bang!" It would take far more co-operation and reason between countries than we'll ever see in our lifetimes.
 

loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,717
4
Anttech said:
dont buy that one bit... According to that list canada has a higher murder rate / person then USA, also Greece does and Finland... come on Finland???? They may have a higher than normal suicide rate, but Finish people arent gun tooting gangsters..
Is your personal incredulity supposed to contradict the data? Did you even look around the site? Their listings are incredibly extensive. They even have crime rates for unpaid diplomatic parking fines. Most of the information seems to come from the UN or from the countries themselves. Why would Finland overstate its own murder rate? And who said they were 'gun-toting' gangsters? They're actually not even on the list for murders using firearms. There are other ways to kill a man, you know.

It doesnt take into account Iraq, where people are getting murder in 10-100 daily right now
Presumably, war crimes are recorded differently.

What people seem to forget about the United States is that, compared to places like Europe, the population is still really spread out. In dense urban areas, the murder rate is much higher, but most of the country is still suburban and rural, where the murder rate is virtually nonexistent. In fact, I've never known of a single murder that's taken place in any city I've ever lived in, although admittedly, I've lived in good neighborhoods.
 
488
0
Hurkyl said:
The U.S. doesn't even show up on the list: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap [Broken]
Because the site doesn't have data for the U.S., not because it's below the bottom of the list. From the 'totals' list it looks like the figure for the U.S. should be about 0.05 per 1000.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,717
4
chronon said:
Because the site doesn't have data for the U.S., not because it's below the bottom of the list. From the 'totals' list it looks like the figure for the U.S. should be about 0.05 per 1000.
0.04 if you take the population reported on the US Census as accurate. That would place it even with Armenia. The count is thought to be low by about 10 million, and those are just non-response households. The count gets even lower by not counting homeless or illegal people. This is all due to the Census Bureau not being allowed to use sampling in population counts (although it can be used for other counts performed by the Census).
 

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,847
17
(Re: #231)

dont buy that one bit...
Okay. But the important thing is that nobody's provided any evidence supporting the characterization of the U.S. as the "Murder capital of the world": it's just a tired stereotype, much like calling Americans

gun tooting gangsters
You're not trying to foster hatred of Americans with that comment, are you?


(Re: #235)

Because the site doesn't have data for the U.S.
Good catch, thanks. My calculations give .044 murders per 1000 people, using the http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html [Broken], placing it around Bulgaria or Armenia (making it about 16th place), as loseyourname said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
210
0
"Murder capital of the world": it's just a tired stereotype, much like calling Americans
its more of a stigma... But it isnt fly of the handle its true that USA has a very high Gun crime and murder rate compared to most other countries..

gun tooting gangsters


You're not trying to foster hatred of Americans with that comment, are you?
No I am not, dont take it personally... I hope you are not trying to foster any hatred towards me by insinuating that I was foster hatred towards USA

Just because I do not aggree with your politics doesnt mean I dislike your people
 
Last edited:

loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,717
4
Anttech said:
its more of a stigma... But it isnt fly of the handle its true that USA has a very high Gun crime and murder rate compared to most other countries..
If you took away DC, Detroit, St. Louis, and some isolated bad neighborhoods in LA and Philly, that wouldn't be the case. The vast bulk of the country is pretty safe. I don't even lock my doors when I leave my apartment or when I sleep at night, and it's not like I live in a rural small town. I'm only about 40 miles north of San Francisco.

Really, I don't see how anyone could call any country other than Columbia the "murder capital of the world" considering that Columbia's rate is double the next closest country.
 
210
0
Anyway I always think of Johansbergh as the "Murder capital of the world"

And I know there are nice places and bad places in America...
 

loseyourname

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,717
4
Anttech said:
Anyway I always think of Johansbergh as the "Murder capital of the world"

And I know there are nice places and bad places in America...
I've heard of Johannesburg as a murderous place, but personally, I've always thought of Medulla and Bogota when I hear the term "murder capital." It seems like people just walk the streets with uzis and M-16s strapped to their backs. Both cities may as well be owned by drug lords.
 
Spin_Network said:
Latest thoughts are that the 'Train-Terrorists', were murdered by the 'Bus-Bomber'. The Bus-Bomber came from the north of England, and was actually reported missing on the morning of the bombings, it is now pretty evident that this man(bus-bomber) set the mobile phone alarms, as a detonating factor.

All four terrorists were in one location in order for the devises to be primed, thus there was one person responcible for setting the activation devise(mobile phone alarm), this is why the 'first three' bombs detonated within a few seconds of each other, one man setting mobile alarms accumilates a 'Time-Lapse' of a few seconds, each alarm needs individual attention.

Thus departing from a single location, the Bus-Bomber MAY have told the individual bombers that their bombs were set, with respect to them being able to leave the location in sufficient time, to escape the blasts.

Having caught the No-30 Bus, he was actually in the process of setting the alarm on the Bomb/s he was preparing, when an 'incoming-call' (maybe from a distant relative worried about his wherabouts (first bombs were by now on TV?) ..actually either panicked him, or actually detonated the devises.

Quite Ironic dont you think!
Evidence of Murder?..Questions start to roll:http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15742951&method=full&siteid=94762&headline=was-it-suicide---name_page.html

It is more than likely that the Bombers were duped, which leads to all manner of other questions which should be asked:

Why no shouts of "ALLAH AKHBAR"?

Why the vast amount of 'Identity Trail' bombers had upon their person (their job carrying out bombings is normally sufficient for entry into heaven , unless its in a future wherby I D cards are essentially the norm) ?

The meeting point, why did the FOUR BOMBERS all leave and meet at a specific location, high risk of capture?

There are more questions..but for now I leave it.

The Families of those murdered now, must include the Bombers families?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
43
0
There sure is a lot of debate about people in this thread. What about the actual bombing?

Did you guys here that some company was running terrorism simulation drills in the London tube at the exact same time the bombings took place? Some guy said it was a 1 and 20 or so zeroes probability there could be a real bombing at the exact same time as a bombing terrorism drill.

I read a chilling scenario someone dreamed up. Some guys go to those 4 pakistani men and asks them if they want to make some money. They say sure. The men tell them "We are doing a terrorism exercise on the London tube. We want you to pretend to be terrorist. Here is your backpack. Here is your target. Go to the tube and be here at such and such a time. After the simulation, come back to the office and we will pay you off". The men think they are doing a patriotic, top secret job, and they are getting paid for it.

What was even more chilling was the descriptions being bandied about the bus bomber. He is described as "diving in his backpack and messing around". The guy who wrote the scenario above also included the idea "What if the man on the bus heard that the tube had been blown up? He was escaping the area. Then he thinks, what if the fake bomb in this backpack is a real bomb? He reaches in the backpack to fiddle with whatever is in there and then the bomb goes off.

I don't know how much connection to reality the story has. Sounded good though. I wonder if they were just innocent guys that got blown up? They are muslim and dead so they cannot say anything. The government can blame them for anything. Someone else made the humorous comment "you notice how terrorists seem to have indestructible ID cards?". They found Atta's ID at the WTC somehow and they found the ID's of these men who they are saying were suicide bombers.

If a bomb blows up an entire train, wouldn't it blow up the ID located in the man's pocket located at the absolute most, 2 feet away from the actual bomb? From the bomb in the back pack down to the wallet in the man's rear pocket might be 2 feet.
 
78
0
Happeh said:
If a bomb blows up an entire train, wouldn't it blow up the ID located in the man's pocket located at the absolute most, 2 feet away from the actual bomb? From the bomb in the back pack down to the wallet in the man's rear pocket might be 2 feet.

Our Professor R.W. going to give give you nice lecture about kinetics and chemistry any time soon.
I think this whole thing stinks like hell of government involvement.
 
210
0
*puts tin hat on*

time for the conspiracy theorists
 
Spin_Network said:
Evidence of Murder?..Questions start to roll:http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15742951&method=full&siteid=94762&headline=was-it-suicide---name_page.html

It is more than likely that the Bombers were duped, which leads to all manner of other questions which should be asked:

Why no shouts of "ALLAH AKHBAR"?

Why the vast amount of 'Identity Trail' bombers had upon their person (their job carrying out bombings is normally sufficient for entry into heaven , unless its in a future wherby I D cards are essentially the norm) ?

The meeting point, why did the FOUR BOMBERS all leave and meet at a specific location, high risk of capture?

There are more questions..but for now I leave it.

The Families of those murdered now, must include the Bombers families?
Following report on the recent bombings in London:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4705939.stm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Spin_Network said:
Following report on the recent bombings in London:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4705939.stm
It is being wildly speculated that the most recent bombings in London, are linked to the Egyptian Bombings. It is thought that there is 'intent' to deflect inquiries by the secret intelligence, into possible Egyptian Islamics having devised and co-ordinated the London Bombings 7/7, 21/7, with the Egyptian Bombings, 'hand-waving' to security to move away from Cairo?

It is believed that the group responsible for the London Bombings, intended to meet and liase in Cairo., having fled the UK before the Bombings. Instructions to ground sympythisers in London being instructed to cause 'smoke-screen' attacks, to draw UK intelligence 'away' from the "real-terrorists".

The amateurish effects of which, is not a single devise was detonated succesfully (assembly co-ordinators not in UK to oversee devise's), the recent London 'terrorists', are infact nothing more that 'dog-bodies', normally asscociated with ensuring food menu's, refreshments etc..etc..were stocked for visiting co-ordinators.

The UK group of followers have been left without any real direction, and after seeing their buddies murdered by the 'real-terrorists' in the 7/7 attack, they are in the process of rushing in, with only thier own irrational thinks.
 

DM

154
0
Spin_Network
It is being wildly speculated that the most recent bombings in London, are linked to the Egyptian Bombings. It is thought that there is 'intent' to deflect inquiries by the secret intelligence, into possible Egyptian Islamics having devised and co-ordinated the London Bombings 7/7, 21/7, with the Egyptian Bombings, 'hand-waving' to security to move away from Cairo?
And why would Al-Qaeda claim they're responsible for the atrocities? I'm assuming the Egyptian Islamics are not part of Al-Qaeda.
 
DM said:
Spin_Network


And why would Al-Qaeda claim they're responsible for the atrocities? I'm assuming the Egyptian Islamics are not part of Al-Qaeda.
Every terrorist needs a home? I should imagine that Bin Laden, is currently doing a photo-shoot, which will no doubt be aired on Al Jazzera soon. It is all about having 'safe' houses. You may not be aware that Al Queda have been known to recruit 'Egyptian' University Grads, they are given preferential treatment, and are held in high regard to global operations.
 

DM

154
0
Spin_Network
Every terrorist needs a home? I should imagine that Bin Laden, is currently doing a photo-shoot, which will no doubt be aired on Al Jazzera soon.
Yes, hilarious!

Spin_Network
It is all about having 'safe' houses. You may not be aware that Al Queda have been known to recruit 'Egyptian' University Grads, they are given preferential treatment, and are held in high regard to global operations.
That still doesn't answer my question. Why would Al-Qaeda claim responsibility for the atrocities when the Egyptian Islamics are part of another terrorist group? sounds implausible, doesn't make much sense. I state this assuming they do not belong to Al-Qaeda.
 

Related Threads for: Bombs in London

  • Posted
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Posted
Replies
19
Views
13K
H
Replies
1
Views
285
  • Posted
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
9K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top