Truck Runs into Crowd in Nice

[FanchesterCity]

Bollards wouldn't stop a light aircraft.
It sounds like a sensible solution, but it's not.

 

[FanchesterCity]

We don't have to accept anything.

True, we don't have to accept reality. Stupid not to though.
Any sensible person has to accept that we're vulnerable regardless of what we do. You simply cannot stop a lone wolf (or small cell) of extremists carrying out some atrocity.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Born in France wasn't he?

In which case why is he so angry. He cannot be fleeing the western bombings and witnessed the horrors of Syria or Iraq as people on here post to somehow justify his actions.

I appreciate the west have made a mess of the Middle East and caused anger and death and distress. However the people who bombed London were from Yorkshire? This twat is French? How can people on here say but look at the Middle East and what we have caused?

If he is French what fucking horrors is he fleeing?

It seems to me people are just accepting terrorism now as just a fact of life. It's very sad , I have no idea how you end it but the policy at the moment isn't doing anything and it will just mean shit will go on years.

Putting barriers up physical or theoretical isn't going to help.

 

[SWP's back]

Can we put the politics in another thread and just remember the victims in this one?

It's a good debate that maybe deserving of its own status.

This thread seems fitting.

Repeating RIP for 3 pages and then the thread disappearing doesn't exactly achieve much anyway. (Not that this thread will achieve an end to Islamist terror anyway to be fair)

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

what part isn't true Mate?

Well I cant remember us ever being at the heart of Europe they dont really like us and we were never getting involved with the migrant crisis really been stand off from the start, rightly or wrongly in peoples eyes.
There are another 25 countries where these refugees can go, 27 if you count Switzerland and Norway so why does it fall on the UK to be the ones who should be at the heart of it.
What you said is true really but us leaving the EU and appointing Boris Johnson realistically does not change these peoples situation or hope of being saved

 

[Sir peace frog]

True, we don't have to accept reality. Stupid not to though.
Any sensible person has to accept that we're vulnerable regardless of what we do. You simply cannot stop a lone wolf (or small cell) of extremists carrying out some atrocity.

we shouldn't be vulnerable , we should be as aggressive as fuck, id follow the Israeli way of doing things , this fuckers family's house should be fucking flattened ,or given to a more deserving case.
if your son wants to go to Syria to fight then great ,here's your airfare and take your fucking family with you, we will give your house to a more deserving case. they need to make sure that people who are doing these sort of things realise it will have ramifications long after they are fucking their 72 virgins.

 

[west didsblue]

In hindsight, it's easy to suggest protection measures for vehicles, but it costs money.
Not only that, what happens when a large crowd gathers and some terrorist wearing a suicide vest kills and mame plenty but the emergency services are hindered by lack of access?
It doesn't even to be a large vehicle. I'm sure a car could do plenty of damage.

If you have any large congregation of people, those people need to get there somehow. If it's not by car, it's by bus, or tram etc, and if you stop all those, then it's on foot. Whichever of those it is, still remains vulnerable. For instance, if you ban all vehicles and only have people on foot, then you slow down the rate of dispersal which becomes a different vulnerability, and you have far larger numbers of pedestrians walking down roads further way from the event giving terrorist more opportunity over a wider area.

We have to accept vulnerability.

It's not difficult to think up reasons why certain measures won't work but that's not a reason not to try. We will never be able to completely prevent something like this happening but the organisers of events where large crowds gather will learn from this and measures will be taken to make this type of attack more difficult.

Of course we have to accept vulnerability but it doesn't mean that measures shouldn't be taken to reduce risk as long as those measures don't impinge too much on our civil liberties.

 

[SWP's back]

Just reported that there are children injured in hospital and also in police stations who have yet to be claimed by parents. So sad

I'm not a touchy feelie soppy sort but reading that just cut through me in half. It's gut renching.

 

[west didsblue]

Not in this country we don't have to do that yet! It makes my blood boil that we have to dance around this subject. The reason France suffers is because it has 9 million Muslims a percentage of which are extremist. That might be 0.0001% it might be ten percent it might be 5% but whatever it is it is a disgrace that children are dead or orphaned today because of warped believes. It is common sense that no stone whatsoever should be unturned in ensuring that intelligence and a zero tolerance approach to any sign of religious extremism is the most important thing that needs to take place to combat extremism in this country. We shouldn't have to even think about putting bollards up to stop evil occurences like last night!

Should we get rid of airport security as well? That's a bit of a pain in the arse sometimes.

 

[FanchesterCity]

In every nation there are nutters. In America right now, there will be some nutter plotting how to gun down a school. Thankfully such people are few and far between but with a large enough population, some tiny percentage will exist and of those, some will carry out such an act.

Extreme Muslims are no different and they have a notional 'cause' to tie their actions to. But it's a mistake to blame Islam for that. Had they been born in America they might have turned out to be a white supremacist or mixed up American teen instead.

Quite possibly increased media coverage has glamourised these acts (in the minds of nutters) and that's deeply regrettable, but we can't put the genie of increased media back into the bottle.

Sure we can look at foreign policy and if we've intervened where we shouldn't have etc, but at the same time, would it be right not to intervene in foreign disputes? is it ok to turn a blind eye to atrocities just because they aren't happening here?