Bomb blasts in London
- Thread starter mal
- Start date
When this stuff happens it always feels very surreal. At least it wasn't as bad as 9/11. 🙁
It is just that bad. After all we all are members of the HUMAN RACE and must condemn any violent demonstration of power, (terrorist, economic, military, or whatsoever). An innocent child´s life is worth the same regardless his/her nationality, religion, color or ideology, it is worth the SAME. The real felons
(religious, militar and political leaders) almost never get puhished for the attrocities they commit, plan, and make followers do.
quoting Alan Parsons´ What goes up
What goes up, must come down
What goes round, must come round
What's been lost, must be found
Our condolences? MAN, that is not enough! we need a change
We need PEACE, we need RESPECT, we need to CARE and MOURN for
our fellow HUMANS. We need to give this mess a decent rational ending.
No more dead HUMANS.
What´s next? Vengeance? it´s so stupid to end a fire throwing more gasoline in it. Unless you define who and how many are going to be
held responsible, stupid terms as "collateral damage" or "casualties of war"
will be used to justify the death of more innocent HUMANS. :/
<!--QuoteBegin-SAG26@Sat, 2005-07-09 @ 09:58 PM
Cowardly bastard terrorists!
[post=136522]Quoted post[/post]
[/quote]
:agree
Everyone who takes advantage of fear and destruction with the only purpose of making its point must be considered that.
I think he was referring to the fact that the loss of life is no where near that of the September 11th attack on the WTC.
Originally posted by siamese@Mon, 2005-07-11 @ 06:10 PM
i know, Mask. What you don´t seem to comprehend is that we, HUMANS
are really important. Killing one or one thousand is GENOCIDE and we must say NEVER AGAIN !Â
[post=136596]Quoted post[/post]
Murdering anyone is abhorent, but I would still argue that murdering 5,000 people is a bit worse than murdering 50-100 people. The former certainly causes a lot more pain and suffering than the latter. Both are terrible things, but I think it's naive to say they're both equally bad.
Murdering someone doesn't instantly make it genocide, though one could argue that the Jihad of the islamic radicals is indeed a genocide mission to wipe out non-muslims (or at least certain non-islamic cultural groups).
I really need to get some sleep, but I'll give it a shot:
My first reaction was just a sort of non-specific feeling of dread. Upon thinking about it, I suppose there's not a whole lot you can say about these events without getting into a geopolitical flamewar. The media coverage is junk, as usual, with our intrepid smiling faces desperate to tell a story of intense crippling devastation while Londoners, by and large, seem to do the right thing and get on with their lives. Thankfully, I don't see anyone in the British government (C-SPAN has had a good bit of House of Commons coverage) making knee-jerk calls to double the number of troops in Iraq or some other specious nonsense*. I guess in general I sort of keep a longing eye out for for the King or Gandhi figure who's going to fix the mess in the middle east through sheer force of will and charisma and righteous indignation, but I suppose I wouldn't hear about such a person anyway.
*: Usually, talking about adding X number of people to an ongoing complex task is pretty silly unless it follows from a necessary modification of the overall strategy. Brooks's Law and all that.
My first reaction was just a sort of non-specific feeling of dread. Upon thinking about it, I suppose there's not a whole lot you can say about these events without getting into a geopolitical flamewar. The media coverage is junk, as usual, with our intrepid smiling faces desperate to tell a story of intense crippling devastation while Londoners, by and large, seem to do the right thing and get on with their lives. Thankfully, I don't see anyone in the British government (C-SPAN has had a good bit of House of Commons coverage) making knee-jerk calls to double the number of troops in Iraq or some other specious nonsense*. I guess in general I sort of keep a longing eye out for for the King or Gandhi figure who's going to fix the mess in the middle east through sheer force of will and charisma and righteous indignation, but I suppose I wouldn't hear about such a person anyway.
*: Usually, talking about adding X number of people to an ongoing complex task is pretty silly unless it follows from a necessary modification of the overall strategy. Brooks's Law and all that.
It's odd - I haven't really felt much one way or the other about this event, save to say I'm buoyed by the general reaction of the British. There doesn't seem to be a great deal of bemoaning fate, or finger pointing, or political posturing that has accompanied other similar events. People seem to be willing to roll up sleeves and get on with cleaning up the mess, rather than making another mess from it.
Maybe I've simply been too removed from the situation to get more than a sketchy feel for the general reaction.
Maybe I've simply been too removed from the situation to get more than a sketchy feel for the general reaction.
That generally is the feel over here Curtis, we just want to get on with things and not let terrorism affect our lives, then they have won.
Currently the death toll is at 52, with others missing. All four bombs were detonated by british citizens of pakistani origin.
This really cant be good for the muslim community as they are allready discriminated against due to the "war on terror" and 9/11. The thing that really bothers me is the lack of motive, if it was an attack on britain why the transport network in london? It was heavily populated with tourists and the blasts caught several muslim children. It just doesnt make sense.
Currently the death toll is at 52, with others missing. All four bombs were detonated by british citizens of pakistani origin.
This really cant be good for the muslim community as they are allready discriminated against due to the "war on terror" and 9/11. The thing that really bothers me is the lack of motive, if it was an attack on britain why the transport network in london? It was heavily populated with tourists and the blasts caught several muslim children. It just doesnt make sense.
Similar threads
