Barbaric attack in the U.K.

[Argus]

I'm totally against what these guys did, BUT I can understand why they did it . As one guy said, the Westerns never see the women and children killed in the Middle-East , more since the 9/11. This areas have lost more people than 2700-2900 that died in 9/11. It has only created more angry people towards the West, violence does work, it only creates more!

Seems to me the vast majority of those killed the middle east were killed by Muslims. It's not westerners bombing the hell out of people in Syria, it's Muslims. It's not westerners blowing up Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, it's Muslims. It's not the west involved in violent jihad in Yemen, it's Muslims. Even in Afghanistan, by far the majority of innocents killed were killed by Muslims. Likewise, in Pakistan, Muslims are shot and blown up and beheaded every day by their fellow Muslims.

And that seems to enrage people like this not in the slightest....

[Black Dog]

And what weapons do those Muslims use? The weapons pumped to them through the U.S., Russia, Israel, Canada, Germany, France, Britain, China etc, all using divide and conquer amongst the Muslims to try and get their resources out the back door, and making a fortune for the arms manufacturers.

Meh. No one is holding a gun to their heads to make them use these weapons to settle ancient tribal conflicts or more modern religious disputes.

Leaving outsiders in charge of the Islamic peoples' future is like leaving the pedophiles in charge of the daycare.

Interesting choice of words, given you seem to think Muslims are as incapable as children of making decisions for themselves.

[Argus]

And what weapons do those Muslims use? The weapons pumped to them through the U.S., Russia, Israel, Canada, Germany, France, Britain, China etc, a

So what you're saying is other nations should decide what Muslim countries are allowed to import because Muslims aren't mature enough, intelligent enough or perhaps just sane enough to make that decision for themselves?

[Argus]

You have to agreed that things have gotten a lot worse since since the first Desert Storm invasion.

Primarily because because of a growing stridency to fundamentalist Islam, to the growing fanaticism of the cultists, and their growing wish for death against any and all who refuse to worship and behave as they do.

[Argus]

If you declare war on people don't be surprised when they fight back. A two year old can figure that out. And don't complain when it gets nasty either.

So you mean, if you blow up buildings in the west, don't be surprised when you get your ass kicked?

[scribblet]

I guess it's all the west's fault that they hack people to death, riot in Sweden (and elsewhere), blow innocent people up including other Muslims .

[BubberMiley]

I guess it's all the west's fault that they hack people to death, riot in Sweden (and elsewhere), blow innocent people up including other Muslims .

I disagree. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

[G Huxley]

I don't see hacking a soldier to death any more barbaric than wiping a bunch of little kids out with clusterbombs in Iraq.

[G Huxley]

Meh. No one is holding a gun to their heads to make them use these weapons to settle ancient tribal conflicts or more modern religious disputes.

Wow you really haven't been paying attention. The whole Middle East and Central Asia have been consistently raped by western imperial intervention at the point of a gun, and then its done its best to funnel as many weapons as possible into the fray in order to encourage divide and conquer tactics.

[G Huxley]

So you mean, if you blow up buildings in the west, don't be surprised when you get your ass kicked?

The Buildings were called Blowback from years of western imperial intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia that has left millions dead and millions displaced.

Your 'we're going to kick their ass,' knee jerk reaction is the typical braindead response that has led to the perpetuation of violence between east and west.

As I said if you're going to brag about kicking their ass, then don't whine like a little baby when some guy gets hacked to death in response.

Edited May 23, 2013 by G Huxley

[gunrutz]

The Buildings were called Blowback from years of western imperial intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia that has left millions dead and millions displaced.

Your 'we're going to kick their ass,' knee jerk reaction is the typical braindead response that has led to the perpetuation of violence between east and west.

As I said if you're going to brag about kicking their ass, then don't whine like a little baby when some guy gets hacked to death in response.

Clearly then the correct response is to ignore people like you and move toward an all out war against anyone who thinks like they do, since we are all the same, just as barbaric, perhaps more so, why pretend otherwise. Yes, innocent people have been killed, many of them, but us barbarians can do much worse when we really choose to defnd our awful interests, see dresden, hiroshima, etc. Of course only the western devil would stoop to such levels, but we are what we are.

[Guest]

I'll say again how utterly shocked I am that something of this barbaric nature could go on in the streets of London, in front of witnesses. It took time to do what these two men did - as people watched. I read in the Guardian that there were unarmed police officers waiting for the arrival of armed officers. You're a Brit - are there really unarmed police officers in London? - and if so, what would they be expected to do if they are unable to deal with such an incident? I have to wonder again if something like this would be attempted/go down in a nation where it's known that citizens could be armed. Do you have any thoughts on that?

"They" declared war on us. So are you not surprised that we fought back? - Or are we not allowed to fight back in your view? Furthermore, I don't recall declaring war on anyone other than those at war with us. We certainly have not been fighting "Muslims," much less anyone in London. The idea that these Islamic extremists care about anyone other than themselves/their mindset is off the wall, so are you saying we should let extremists do whatever they like? Not fight back? I expect you won't have a problem answering my questions since "a two year old" could.

You hit the nail on the head. It would be no different if any westerners took out innocent Muslims. And like you, I would most definitely have a problem with it.

There are unarmed police all over the UK, or at least, there was the last time I was home. There is a traditionalist movement to keep them that way, only arming specially trained police for action when the circumstances dictate, but as the "other" side of the conflict appears to have gone with the times I think it's time to arm the full police service. The Bobby on the beat might have been okay half a century ago, but not so much now.

I think this would definitely go down in a country where citizens could be armed. One of the problems with these nutters is that they don't fear death. Something to do with virgins. God only knows where they are all coming from these days.

It would have been fun to watch them being blown away by a couple of grannies and a soccer mom though. I'm like a lot of people when it comes to arming folk. I have no problem with it as long as the rules are followed. Background checks, that sort of thing. The world is changing. I would definitely want to be able to defend myself.

Edited May 24, 2013 by bcsapper

[Wilber]

There are unarmed police all over the UK, or at least, there was the last time I was home. There is a traditionalist movement to keep them that way, only arming specially trained police for action when the circumstances dictate, but as the "other" side of the conflict appears to have gone with the times I think it's time to arm the full police service. The Bobby on the beat might have been okay half a century ago, but not so much now.

I think this would definitely go down in a country where citizens could be armed. One of the problems with these nutters is that they don't fear death. Something to do with virgins. God only knows where they are all coming from these days.

It would have been fun to watch them being blown away by a couple of grannies and a soccer mom though. I'm like a lot of people when it comes to arming folk. I have no problem with it as long as the rules are followed. Background checks, that sort of thing. The world is changing. I would definitely want to be able to defend myself.

Personally, I don't think having to arm yourself is the mark of a more civilized country and this is why I think the Brits have resisted arming their patrol officers. Has it become necessary to arm them? I don't know. Do you arm every cop in the country because of one incident? I don't think so.

[Guest]

Personally, I don't think having to arm yourself is the mark of a more civilized country and this is why I think the Brits have resisted arming their patrol officers. Has it become necessary to arm them? I don't know. Do you arm every cop in the country because of one incident? I don't think so.

I have to admit, I didn't think civilised entered into it. The safety of the police, and of the public they are charged to protect was my only consideration. There are only a few countries in the world that do not arm their police.

Having said all this, I do believe that the majority of british police officers are against their being armed.

My view remains the same, however. I would prefer them armed and trained.

[Wilber]

I think being civilized has everything to do with it. I don't see living in a place where the need to be armed (real or perceived) is as civilized as living in a place where one doesn't. The issue of whether British police need to be armed or not will run its course but for the present, the fact they don't is one of the things about them I admire.

[Guest]

I agree it would be awfully civilised to live in a place where there was no need to arm the police. That would be a place where the bad guys didn't arm themselves either. Such places are now few and far between, and disappearing, I think.

If you believe we are becoming less civilised as a species, You won't find me disagreeing with you.

[G Huxley]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

Here's what happens when you lived in an armed Orwellian Society.

[Wilber]

When it comes to the need to arm our police, we are definitely less civilized. When I was young the average cop carried a 38 Special revolver and that was about it. I remember the Edmonton police asking for better ammunition because the stuff they had would barely penetrate a car windshield and in some cases wouldn't. Now they go to work with a Glock or Barretta 9mm on their hip with a 12 gauge and Diamaco C8 in their car. I don't see that as progress and I don't think the Brits do either.

[Guest]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

Here's what happens when you lived in an armed Orwellian Society.

And the opening post describes what happens when you don't. Both points are ridiculous.

[G Huxley]

The choice live in an armed Orwellian society where police gun down people in the streets, or live an an unarmed Orwellian society where people are hacked to bits in the streets.

Or live in a peaceful society.

Tough choice.

Edited May 24, 2013 by G Huxley

[Guest]

When it comes to the need to arm our police, we are definitely less civilized. When I was young the average cop carried a 38 Special revolver and that was about it. I remember the Edmonton police asking for better ammunition because the stuff they had would barely penetrate a car windshield and in some cases wouldn't. Now they go to work with a Glock or Barretta 9mm on their hip with a 12 gauge and Diamaco C8 in their car. I don't see that as progress and I don't think the Brits do either.

The Brits are undecided. Approximately 50/50 with regard to arming the police. As I said earlier, though, the police themselves are overwhelmingly against it. Last time anyone asked.

Personally, I'm for it, but no-ones going to ask me.

[Guest]

The choice live in an armed Orwellian society where police gun down people in the streets, or live an an unarmed Orwellian society where people are hacked to bits in the streets.

Or live in a peaceful society.

Tough choice.

Oooh, I choose peaceful society.

Get on it, would you, and let me know when you've finished?

Edited May 24, 2013 by bcsapper

[G Huxley]

Check out Switzerland, Costa Rica (no military), Iceland (also no standing army) etc. etc.

That you can't even fathom living in a peaceful society like in so many other countries is pretty sad.

Edited May 25, 2013 by G Huxley

[Guest]

Check out Switzerland, Costa Rica (no military), Iceland (also no standing army) etc. etc.

That you can't even fathom living in a peaceful society like in so many other countries is pretty sad.

Which of the three did you choose to live in? Or were you born in one of them, so you didn't have to choose?

That you think those choices actually exist is pretty... is pretty... nnnnggg no, I can't say it. The most overused word on the internet.

Except for Nazi.

[Guest American Woman]

There are unarmed police all over the UK, or at least, there was the last time I was home. There is a traditionalist movement to keep them that way, only arming specially trained police for action when the circumstances dictate, but as the "other" side of the conflict appears to have gone with the times I think it's time to arm the full police service. The Bobby on the beat might have been okay half a century ago, but not so much now.

Thank you for your response.

The first thing that comes to mind is how does one know when "circumstances [will] dictate?" Certainly they did while this was going down, yet the police at hand were unarmed - and apparently unable to do anything but watch, same as everyone else. I really fail to see what use police officers who can't do anything would serve.

I think this would definitely go down in a country where citizens could be armed. One of the problems with these nutters is that they don't fear death. Something to do with virgins. God only knows where they are all coming from these days.

My reason for thinking it wouldn't go down is not a fear of death, but the thoughts that they would likely not be able to carry it through. If they feel as if they cannot accomplish what they hope to accomplish, I think they would be less likely to attempt it. Obviously they wanted to get their message across; they didn't flee, they stood around while people were video taping them. If they they thought they would have been stopped by a bullet before they even killed the solider, before they could get their message across, I don't think attmpting the murder would have served their purpose.

It would have been fun to watch them being blown away by a couple of grannies and a soccer mom though. I'm like a lot of people when it comes to arming folk. I have no problem with it as long as the rules are followed. Background checks, that sort of thing. The world is changing. I would definitely want to be able to defend myself.

I think the need for people to defend themselves has always been there. I don't see the world as changing in that regard.

I have to admit, I didn't think civilised entered into it. The safety of the police, and of the public they are charged to protect was my only consideration. There are only a few countries in the world that do not arm their police.

I think it depends on one's view of "civilized." Is the ability of such an act to occur while unarmed police can do nothing to stop "civilized?" I would think having the ability to stop such a barbaric act would be considered "civilized." That people can just stand by and watch while such an atrocity takes place doesn't fit my definition of being civilized.

I agree it would be awfully civilised to live in a place where there was no need to arm the police. That would be a place where the bad guys didn't arm themselves either. Such places are now few and far between, and disappearing, I think.

If you believe we are becoming less civilised as a species, You won't find me disagreeing with you.

I think it would be impossible to live in a place where there is no need to arm the police, and I don't think the level of civilization really has anything to do with it. There are always going to be reasons why people do what they do - that reality that we aren't all 'wired' the same way is reason enough that there will always be people doing the wrong thing, regardless of how "civilized" societies become.

At any rate, I think we are, without a doubt, becoming more civilized as a species. I don't think we have to look back all that far within our own nations histories to see proof of that.