• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Berlin terror attack

Awful news.
It was in the paper last weekend I think (one before this one just gone) that there were intelligence reports of plans to attack Christmas markets or other festive type gatherings. But unless there is something very concrete, there's no way for the authorities to cover everything. And even if they could, how do you deal with a weapon that is a multi-ton lorry? Shoot the driver and the lorry runs out of control. Shoot the tyres, same result. Shut off and roadblock all access points? Probably impractical and if terror is your intent, you'll find something into which to ramraid your lorry.
It's the randomness of the attacks that makes targets so difficult to predict. Let's hope this isn't the start of a Christmas campaign of terror.
 
I see they caught the guy.

Any chance we can make the punishment festive and start it by force feeding him pigs in blankets and mulled wine?
 
I see the outpouring of sympathy from the left is towards the Middle East

Britain has to feel the guilt for the British Empire, Italy for the Roman Empire and Germany for the Nazi's yet the West ALSO has to shoulder the blame for ISIS and Islamic terrorism, great
 
Grays_1890 said:
I see the outpouring of sympathy from the left is towards the Middle East

Britain has to feel the guilt for the British Empire, Italy for the Roman Empire and Germany for the Nazi's yet the West ALSO has to shoulder the blame for ISIS and Islamic terrorism, great
Click to expand...

Its deeper routed than that i think. It seems to be a divide between understanding what their so called holy scriptures tell them to do. The Koran seems to be misinterpreted among Muslims.

The terror groups are clever though. The will use the Koran, kids, the west etc, anything to carry on their agenda. They want to be bombed as that causes more people to join them and get stronger. What is the answer though? i feel better vetting and less freedom of movement is needed. People would soon rather that than bombing the brick out of these countries. They cowards hide behind women and children. They always have done and the West and the public fall for it all the time. They feel guilt and more immigrants move in.

Then 1 or 2 idiots attack us here in europe
 
Spursman said:
What is the answer though? i feel better vetting and less freedom of movement is needed. People would soon rather that than bombing the brick out of these countries.
Click to expand...

Yeh I agree but people will always argue that ethnic screening is a racist move, even if its for the greater good.

Personally if I was asked to be checked twice before travelling for the greater good of the worlds safety I would have no problem with it, in fact I have it when I travel for England, that is ethnic profiling, White English man checked three times because of a a few hooligans, and I am happy to if it means weeding out the crap.

You have to ask people how serious is terrorism and how serious are you about taking it on.
 
How do you vet millions of people coming from war torn countries with little to no documentation?

Hooligans have been stopped because they have been identified committing crimes as hooligans. So it's possible to know who they are. How do you identify the terrorists well enough before they actually perform the terrorist act?

Of course there needs to be vetting and one should try to improve security whenever possible. But it's a complete illusion to think that this is a way to end terrorism unless you're willing to accept living in Orwell's 1984.

Profiling makes sense on a financial and security level.
 
Got a mate who's British Indian, traveled to america a few times. Always gets taken away for extra checks! we always give him a hard time about it. Its so funny. Then he pulls out his police warrant card at the airport and staff laugh (after checking him anyway)

Unfortunately certain groups will always have stereotypes against them, people should just realise how important all the checking is.

There isnt really a right answer to the problem but i feel less freedom of movement is the most peaceful way of doing things. No one wants wars but the terrorists, lets not give them what they want although its satisfying to see them get bombed up!
 
braineclipse said:
How do you vet millions of people coming from war torn countries with little to no documentation?

Hooligans have been stopped because they have been identified committing crimes as hooligans. So it's possible to know who they are. How do you identify the terrorists well enough before they actually perform the terrorist act?
Click to expand...

I would say that beyond certain obvious (women and children) no one is above suspicion. I am not a hooligan and I was checked three times recently, so I was not above suspicion and I was ok with it. And lets get it straight, not all these terrorists are undocumented, many have documents and have flown into countries not come in on immigrant boats.

Single White Females on flights back to the UK from flights from Jamaica are on the profile list, no difference to single male muslim coming into the country from the Middle East, its all profiling.

As I will always say, its all well and good saying people want safety, I ask how much do you want it.
 
Spursman said:
Got a mate who's British Indian, traveled to america a few times. Always gets taken away for extra checks! we always give him a hard time about it. Its so funny. Then he pulls out his police warrant card at the airport and staff laugh (after checking him anyway)

Unfortunately certain groups will always have stereotypes against them, people should just realise how important all the checking is.

There isnt really a right answer to the problem but i feel less freedom of movement is the most peaceful way of doing things. No one wants wars but the terrorists, lets not give them what they want although its crack covering to see them get bombed up!
Click to expand...

Less freedom of movement will only get you a very small step in the direction of more security.

Grays_1890 said:
I would say that beyond certain obvious (women and children) no one is above suspicion. I am not a hooligan and I was checked three times recently, so I was not above suspicion and I was ok with it. And lets get it straight, not all these terrorists are undocumented, many have documents and have flown into countries not come in on immigrant boats.

Single White Females on flights back to the UK from flights from Jamaica are on the profile list, no difference to single male muslim coming into the country from the Middle East, its all profiling.

As I will always say, its all well and good saying people want safety, I ask how much do you want it.
Click to expand...

But even with documents how do you actually vet them? How do you identify the terrorists from the non-terrorists? And doing so with the effectiveness needed to process millions of people in a way that is not entirely prohibited by costs and practical issues?

I don't want safety at the cost it would have to come at if we're talking about the kind of safety that would stop terrorist attacks like this one.

I would like some honesty though. I would have liked Merkel and other liberal politicians in Europe to be explicitly clear what the risks and likely outcomes of their policies were. I'm willing to accept a certain level of risk and I think most people are. Let's have a conversation as a society about what risks we're willing to accept for the benefit of helping people in need. And if we're unwilling as a society to carry that risk let's find other ways to help where the risk is lower.

But we haven't even been able to talk about that risk because apparently you're a racist if you think there's a risk of terrorists coming into Europe alongside genuine seekers of help and asylum.
 
The thing is, we are not likely to stop was as a world, ever and terrorism comes as a part of war and always has done. So what do you do? You have to take the ball away from people and put in place preventative measures.

I think as an Island race we have done pretty well at it, 7/7 was bad but since the days of the IRA we have kept the high risk down to a minimal, when you take into account we are probably the worlds number 1/2 target. As an offshoot from that relative safety we have a pretty stricter policy on immigration from hotspots, when you compare what we have done for Syrians against Germany for example, and I would not change that for the world.
 
Grays_1890 said:
The thing is, we are not likely to stop was as a world, ever and terrorism comes as a part of war and always has done. So what do you do? You have to take the ball away from people and put in place preventative measures.

I think as an Island race we have done pretty well at it, 7/7 was bad but since the days of the IRA we have kept the high risk down to a minimal, when you take into account we are probably the worlds number 1/2 target. As an offshoot from that relative safety we have a pretty stricter policy on immigration from hotspots, when you compare what we have done for Syrians against Germany for example, and I would not change that for the world.
Click to expand...

How far are you willing to go to put in place preventative measures?

Not sure how accurate such things are, but apparently there's a global terrorism index. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Terrorism_Index UK are doing alright I suppose, but not particularly well.

Why would you say you are the worlds number 1/2 target?
 
braineclipse said:
Why would you say you are the worlds number 1/2 target?
Click to expand...

I would go as far as needed to ensure the safety of British people, I believe one life is too many and would do all I can to prevent it happening.

To answer the above I believe we are up there in the top two targets for external terrorist groups making attacks. No doubt there are countries that suffer worse but I am talking as a potential target. I believe the reason why mainland Europe is attacked is in some cases is because they are unable to get close enough to us to be able to do it. ISIS for example would have the UK and the US as their main targets in an ideal world, thats why the UK government has shifted their resources from the main police to anti terrorism and intelligence.

As one of the most influential cities in the world, London will always be a prime terror target.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I would go as far as needed to ensure the safety of British people, I believe one life is too many and would do all I can to prevent it happening.

To answer the above I believe we are up there in the top two targets for external terrorist groups making attacks. No doubt there are countries that suffer worse but I am talking as a potential target. I believe the reason why mainland Europe is attacked is in some cases is because they are unable to get close enough to us to be able to do it. ISIS for example would have the UK and the US as their main targets in an ideal world, thats why the UK government has shifted their resources from the main police to anti terrorism and intelligence.

As one of the most influential cities in the world, London will always be a prime terror target.
Click to expand...

"All I can do" is a non-answer in my book. How far in terms of the freedoms you would be willing to restrict would you go? How far in terms of resources spent would you be willing to go?

You don't think countries like Russia and Israel might be targeted at least as much?
 
braineclipse said:
How do you vet millions of people coming from war torn countries with little to no documentation?

Hooligans have been stopped because they have been identified committing crimes as hooligans. So it's possible to know who they are. How do you identify the terrorists well enough before they actually perform the terrorist act?

Of course there needs to be vetting and one should try to improve security whenever possible. But it's a complete illusion to think that this is a way to end terrorism unless you're willing to accept living in Orwell's 1984.

Profiling makes sense on a financial and security level.
Click to expand...
Make them tinkle on a Quran/Bible/appropriate religious symbol. If getting into the country is more important than their religion they're welcome, if not then they need to find somewhere else to go.
 
braineclipse said:
"All I can do" is a non-answer in my book. How far in terms of the freedoms you would be willing to restrict would you go? How far in terms of resources spent would you be willing to go?

You don't think countries like Russia and Israel might be targeted at least as much?
Click to expand...

Ok well I respect someones life or lose of life more than I do someone elses perceived right to claim asylum.

Israel suffer more than us from the fight within, thats true as do, Turkey, a number of African countries and the sub continent, I am saying we are a higher target for external threats, thats Target not victim, Target and I am happy to restrict someones rights (thats a vague word because in rights) if it ensured the safety of the British public.

And the word freedoms is really another vague term, in the interest of world safety do I get the freedoms of the world? Behave, if I go to Canada and the US I now go through a visa and check process, if I go to Kuwait I need a pre travel VISA so I am not sure what freedoms you feel others are entitled to or would be missing out on?

Questions - would you say Berlin or Paris or Brussels is a just a small price to pay as long as peoples rights and freedoms are respected?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back