Police State

[Damocles]

Yes, you said. And the proper response was for the UN to push him out of it again. All worked out fine. And noticeably no terrorists threatening to blow us up while we did it. Much safer to be doing the 'right' thing.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend? First time round that made everyone in the region our friend. This time round it makes them all our enemies. Not clever.

 

[jasy]

No evidence has been produced that Sadam was building any terror weapons or planning anything outside his own country. All we have had are excuses why they got it wrong.
.

So he never fired anything at Israel or ever used chemical weapons in the Iranian war or was trying to overrun Kuwait again. He never used chemical weapons on his own people or tortured and murdered thousands others. Let's let him carry on. He is a nice bloke really

 

[Damocles]

He had lots of weapons and he used them. Then the Americans came round and trashed them. They also scared the living daylights out of him so that he would not do it again. And it all worked.

Then the Americans decided that because a totally unrelated set of people had the temerity to blow up some American skyscrapers, they would just invade Iraq. Their justification was that he had rebuilt his weapons. He had not. The Americans tried to scare the rest of the world into doing what they wanted. Happily, most countries did not believe their lies. Not 'happily' because I have anything against Americans, but 'happily' because so many countries managed to stand up the most powerful country in the world and tell it (correctly) that it was mistaken.

 

[jasy]

He had lots of weapons and he used them. Then the Americans came round and trashed them. They also scared the living daylights out of him so that he would not do it again. And it all worked.

Then the Americans decided that because a totally unrelated set of people had the temerity to blow up some American skyscrapers, they would just invade Iraq. .

Hmm, the first Gulf of which i witnessed first hand was made up of dozens of nations not just the americans. Secondly, NO, all his weapons were not destroyed as the job did not get finished in 91. And to say that it was to just "blow up some american skyscrapers" you certainly be-little the atrocity. facts are what is neede and you seem to be making up yours to fuel your own imagination

 

[Damocles]

Which facts did i make up?

After the invasion no significant weapons were found. Everyone has now just about admitted there were none immediately before the invasion. After gulf war one the Iraqis were deliberately allowed to keep most of their general army equipment to prevent the country collapsing. This did not pose any threat to us.

The Americans were the biggest contributors to the first gulf war army and controlled it. If they had refused to take part, then kuwait would now be part of Iraq.

About 3,000 people were killed in the world trade building attacks. About 40,000 are killed each year on American roads. 500,000 have 'smoking related' deaths and 2,500,000 die each year. This means that your chance of being killed by a terrorist in America is still about 1 in a million. By a car about 1 in 60 and by smoking about 1 in 5. Now which of these should we be worrying about?

 

[loublou]

which to worry about? why, all of them!

It's more a question of where to start and when to finish. Alas the threat of terror is an election issue and that may be distorting the facts. We are closely related to the states and probably always will be so best get used to this sort of scare moungering to gain attention! Attention means votes.

I think the issue can be best summed up by a quote given by an email comment to sky.... 'if you've no connection with terrorists you've nothing to worry about'

What does that say?

Alas, a sad state of ignorance!

 

[masona]

About 3,000 people were killed in the world trade building attacks. About 40,000 are killed each year on American roads. 500,000 have 'smoking related' deaths and 2,500,000 die each year. This means that your chance of being killed by a terrorist in America is still about 1 in a million. By a car about 1 in 60 and by smoking about 1 in 5. Now which of these should we be worrying about?

I would say the difference is that the terrorist are killing people on purpose whereas the others are self-inflicted or accident.

 

[Damocles]

Well your chance of being killed in this country in an electrical related incident is about 1 in 10 million. Quite a few people have said that this death rate is not nearly enough to justify the fuss and expense of introducing the new building regs about electrics.

At 1 in a million the American terrorist risk is 10x more dangerous. But then, the equivalent would be to lock up unregistered electrical installers for life without trial. Would this be reasonable?

Now, how do you rate the risk from nuclear power stations? Everything fine, then suddenly a big bang, oh dear. Should they all be arrested too?

 

[david and julie]

It is doubtful that the part P regulations have anything to do with deaths from poorly installed electrics. They are more about job creation at the expense of the consumer rather than the government. I would suspect it may even increase the death rate but we will not know for certain for a while, even then they will change the counting method to suit. The reason I say this is that fully qualified and registered installers will be more expensive due to increased overheads and less competition. The alternative is to use the council to inspect your work, this will be expensive and the inspector will be bogged down in red tape. Either of these reasons may have an adverse effect and cause more DIY efforts, some of which will be downright dangerous. Sounds like another JP effort doomed to failure to me.

When considering the way people die also think about the ones left behind. Getting over a loss caused by accident is one thing, nightmares and flashbacks of their head being hacked off is another.

 

[jasy]

Which facts did i make up?
About 3,000 people were killed in the world trade building attacks. This means that your chance of being killed by a terrorist in America is still about 1 in a million. Now which of these should we be worrying about?

So the level of an atrocity is now denoted by how many people are killed..................grow up!! It is a terrorist attack when just one person dies. Accidents happen, the twin towers was pre meditated. Madrid was pre meditated but these attacks are ok in your eyes because of percentages

 

[Thermo]

how many die?
how many are injured?
how many are scarred for life with mental trauma?
how long is a community ripped apart for?
how long does the fear of the next attack last for?

count numbers or percentages if you like, but until you have picked up the bits and dealt with it then i think you are commenting from a very naive position.
That hysteria, media and politics plays a part is of no doubt, but don't be blind there is a threat, it is real.

 

[jasy]

could not agre more. Damocles is obviously reading to much fiction!

 

[Damocles]

You guys seem to be saying that even one death is one death too many. Well, I am afraid that is rubbish. It all comes down to how likely it is that you or I will die because of this. That is what it is about.

Every day we accept that people will die on the roads, be run down by speeding police cars, killed by careless doctors, get ripped to pieces leaning too far into a big machine. Mr Blair has accepted, indeed chosen, that quite a few British citizens will die because he sent them out to shoot Iraqis. Everybody lives with the risk of death all the time, every single day. Government is all about choosing which things will really make our lives better, which things will make them worse.

Mr Blair made the choice to trade British lives for world peace. Or something. He did the calculations about how many deaths were acceptable for the goals he hoped to achieve.

So why are you having nightmares about peoples heads being hacked off? Once upon a time it was very popular to watch a good beheading in this country. Do you not think that showing these films was intended to make the British public and government rush off and do all the wrong things?

I mean to win the war against terrorism. This will never be done by creating more terrorists than you catch.

 

[kendor]

Terrorism can be interpreted many different ways it's all down to the individuals point of view, what all destruction and killing is, is an atrocity and because an authority such as a government in power or dictatorship or other form of leadership does it in the name of justice means nothing it is still the senseless taking of life, what politicians need to do is sit back and take account of their actions and ask themselves why others take it upon themselves to do harm to others in the first place.
9 times out of 10 it's greed and power that has made ordinary folk turn into "terrorists" or "freedom fighters" call them what you will, but if giants like the USA think they can meddle with others lives and not understand why they get reprisals then the battle will rage a long time.
It is time for Israel to hand back the occupied lands, for America to stop playing power games with peoples lives( including their own) and for governments to work towards solving the problems that cause these conflicts rather than just try to sweep them under the carpet and hope they go away or worse still flex their mightier muscles hoping that will solve the problem.
As we know you can't break peoples spirit easily and that method just generates tomorrows "terrorists".
Stop interfering in others business - good advice?

 

[pipme]

......... just generates tomorrows "terrorists".
Stop interfering in others business - good advice?

Can you risk tomorrow's terrorist becoming tomorrow's leader ?
People continually interfere in other's business, at local levels it is almost impossible not to do so, with us all living on top of each other in such poorly planned urban areas ...
On the world stage tis about resources ... and it ain't all over by a long way .... China is beginning to breath fire, they'll want their share of the percieved 'goodlife' too, no doubt.....
P