Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Frazzled wrote:If you recollect we wanted to do that in Afghanistan. The Taliban said no. So it was war.

I agree we should do much more of that special forces stuff. Primary attacks regardless of borders. I am very down with that.

But we have to treat these guys as terrorists and not criminals. They don't have rights.

You don't ask the taliban, you just send in helicopters and murder the murderers.

This isn't working because we've gone to war, we declared the state of war and used our army. They always are at war, they send individuals, they intend to cause massed civilian casualties and spread fear and misery.

We should adapt, respond in the language they understand. We need to stop feeding their anger and start bringing them real fear.

We have been. We are agreed that that should continue and be expanded.

Islam is the largest religion in the world, with a large and growing number of white converts, and using disenfranchised lower-class white members to carry out plans is an avenue islamic terrorist groups will go down. security and intelligence agencies have no care for political correctness, they don't come under the same employment laws as other ministries and agencies.

the area we need to work on is fast, reliable portable lab instruments for rapid detection and determination of explosives from different sources. the US military have bought a system for the detection of a range of explosives from a British company that uses a toster sized container which uses bees as the detector (it actually works, my fiancee was shown it in a presentation at UCL)

Frazzled wrote:We have been. We are agreed that that should continue and be expanded.

Damn Straight, and if the lefty gakkers that run Britain didnt give civil servants 250k payouts for repetitive strain injuries whilst spitting squarely in the face of our veterans i would be over there for my third tour happily. The Americans actually look after their veterans.



When the Tories piss the next election i might sign back up. The labour lot like to use us but then stuff us in a cage if we are unlucky enough to get wounded in action. All the time spewing their lies about respecting the armed forces "great" efforts. The current UK administration have been anti armed forces since their inception, and they take us for fools. Bawling their eyes out while Euan flies off to Harvard or wherever the feth it was. Our wives didnt cry when we went to Iraq you fething self serving Afghan representing rubber faced fething crone.......

BluntmanDC wrote: Islam is the largest religion in the world

Can you support that with some documentation? It is one of the largest, but I am not sure if it is absolutely the biggest. Hindu has almost a billion adherents, if not a little more.

easiest answer in the world.... I drive, if I can't drive there then well theirs a boat im sure. If not sucks for me I shouldn't be going to that place then.

Agreed. Frankly that whole flying thing really sucks now.

I was thinking of banning muslims from flying, killing or torturing people or banning planes from going anywhere. Wait, sorry...

Realistically, what about some sort of voluntary "pre-background check" that could help things move along faster for you personally. Submit the required info a week in advance, submit to being fully checked "if necessary," fully check some people and conform to a certain standard of dress and carry-on that allows for the process to go quicker. If any red flags go up you get fully checked, and you don't know if it will happen til you get to the airport. Or you can choose not to do all that in advance and wait in slightly huger lines. At least it would be faster for some then :/

mattyrm wrote:

Frazzled wrote:We have been. We are agreed that that should continue and be expanded.

Damn Straight, and if the lefty gakkers that run Britain didnt give civil servants 250k payouts for repetitive strain injuries whilst spitting squarely in the face of our veterans i would be over there for my third tour happily. The Americans actually look after their veterans.



When the Tories piss the next election i might sign back up. The labour lot like to use us but then stuff us in a cage if we are unlucky enough to get wounded in action. All the time spewing their lies about respecting the armed forces "great" efforts. The current UK administration have been anti armed forces since their inception, and they take us for fools. Bawling their eyes out while Euan flies off to Harvard or wherever the feth it was. Our wives didnt cry when we went to Iraq you fething self serving Afghan representing rubber faced fething crone.......

Kipling had it down with this poem:


I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Kipling, that was the guy who justified slavery as a "White Man's Burden" right?

Ahtman wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote: Islam is the largest religion in the world

Can you support that with some documentation? It is one of the largest, but I am not sure if it is absolutely the biggest. Hindu has almost a billion adherents, if not a little more.

It's the largest if you count Catholics and Protestants separately, otherwise Christianity is the largest. Hindu's are actually behind the non-religious.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,343336,00.html
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

avantgarde wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote: Islam is the largest religion in the world

Can you support that with some documentation? It is one of the largest, but I am not sure if it is absolutely the biggest. Hindu has almost a billion adherents, if not a little more.

It's the largest if you count Catholics and Protestants separately, otherwise Christianity is the largest. Hindu's are actually behind the non-religious.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,343336,00.html
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

I wasn't meaning to imply that Hindu was the largest, just pointing out there are others out there with large numbers.

I wasn't saying you were, I just found it funny that they were behind atheists/agnostics.

We have been. We are agreed that that should continue and be expanded.

Funny then how they, Al-queda, and virtually ever other islamist militant organization on the terror watch list has grown since we started treating it like a war rather than a crime. It's as if all this fear, reactionary violence, and loud mouthed rhetoric plays right into their hands and helps them recruit disenfranchised youths from countries that we bomb! You can't prevent terrorism with war, you only aid it by spreading strife. You stop terrorism with jobs, prosperity, and social wellbeing in the regions they draw recruits from. Thats done by providing security and training, but through the filter of local powers, not an omnipresent foreign force supermanning around and fething up. It took us too long to realize that in Iraq and we abandoned afghanistan and let the situation get worse by providing every militant within a thousand miles a perfect training ground in Iraq.

You cant prevent terrorism when you reduce those regions to warzones (Hence why Iraq has become a fertile recruiting ground for international terrorism in addition to the local sectarian power struggles).

Ahtman wrote:Kipling, that was the guy who justified slavery as a "White Man's Burden" right?

According to this and other articles, it had more to do with western countries helping out the third world , not slavery. It also seemed a comment on the U.S in the Phillipines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden

And Jim Crowe was just about keeping the peace. So it is about European Imperialism and defacto-slavery. My bad.

Hard to say, since there seem to be many interpretations of what the poem means. Some say it was satire, others say it was pro imperialism, etc.
This could end up making a good separate(but equal) thread.

Frazzled wrote:
But we have to treat these guys as terrorists and not criminals. They don't have rights.

The Geneva Conventions disagree.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I was thinking of banning muslims from flying, killing or torturing people or banning planes from going anywhere. Wait, sorry...

Realistically, what about some sort of voluntary "pre-background check" that could help things move along faster for you personally. Submit the required info a week in advance, submit to being fully checked "if necessary," fully check some people and conform to a certain standard of dress and carry-on that allows for the process to go quicker. If any red flags go up you get fully checked, and you don't know if it will happen til you get to the airport. Or you can choose not to do all that in advance and wait in slightly huger lines. At least it would be faster for some then :/

Where are these people that wait in ridiculous lines for domestic flights? There was a time I was flying back and forth between New York and Chicago every other week, and I never waited more than 30-45 minutes. If you really can't bear that, then buy first class tickets. There's never a line for preferred security.

ShumaGorath wrote:

We have been. We are agreed that that should continue and be expanded.

Funny then how they, Al-queda, and virtually ever other islamist militant organization on the terror watch list has grown since we started treating it like a war rather than a crime.

Please support your claim or its merely opinion.

Thanks for that poem Relapse, i enjoyed it and it was the first time i have read it.

It reminds me of a poem i read in the front of a book about the Royal Marines called "Our God and Soldier"

Our God and soldier we alike adore.
Even at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited.
Our God's forgotten, and our soldiers slighted

Frazzled wrote:
Please support your claim or its merely opinion.

Its a notion that's fairly popular in the defense community.

Look here, and here.

Granted, the Mother Jones article isn't the best source, but its all I can turn up without digging through LexisNexis.

mattyrm wrote:Thanks for that poem Relapse, i enjoyed it and it was the first time i have read it.

It reminds me of a poem i read in the front of a book about the Royal Marines called "Our God and Soldier"

Our God and soldier we alike adore.
Even at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited.
Our God's forgotten, and our soldiers slighted

I think you'd like a lot of Kipling's poems since he wrote a lot about soldiers and had lost a son in WW1.

Here's a link to a good site: http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/kipling_ind.html

I have to admit Frazz (for probably the first and last time ever) that i agree with Shuma for once.

My time over in the sandbox made me realise that the Islamic faith is extremely aggresive with the whole "revenge" thing, and many members of the ANP joined up because of family members attacked or brutalised by the Taliban. Stands to reason it swings both ways and many more Jihadis have leapt up for a scrap after we started smashing the buggers.

Not that i think we should stop of course.

mattyrm wrote:I have to admit Frazz (for probably the first and last time ever) that i agree with Shuma for once.

My time over in the sandbox made me realise that the Islamic faith is extremely aggresive with the whole "revenge" thing, and many members of the ANP joined up because of family members attacked or brutalised by the Taliban. Stands to reason it swings both ways and many more Jihadis have leapt up for a scrap after we started smashing the buggers.

Not that i think we should stop of course.

You may be right.

As someone who spends most of time studying national security, strategy and terrorism as well, I have to say the best way you can go actually is to not bring any technological solution. By bringing restrictions you are doing exactly what the terrorist organization wants - spreading the fear while cutting the freedom of your nation and paralyzing your economy.

Terrorists would simply start targeting malls, train stations, squares and other public areas instead, so the technological solution would be worthless while you spent billions of dollars/euros/pounds on a technology that restricts your freedom, slows down your economy and is in the end worthless as the terrorists will simply find other ways.

I have to admit Frazz (for probably the first and last time ever) that i agree with Shuma for once.

It will happen more and more if you start to actually figure out how the world works.

Not that i think we should stop of course.

So you think it's ineffectual and harmful, but you don't think we should stop? Glad to see the moral high ground of the UK fail completely.

You may be right.

Funny how it requires a slight (but meaningless) concession by someone you agree with for you to change your mind even the smallest bit, while being shown wrong outright is something you can simply ignore.

As someone who spends most of time studying national security, strategy and terrorism as well, I have to say the best way you can go actually is to not bring any technological solution.

What is a "technological solution"?

Funny how it requires a slight (but meaningless) concession by someone you agree with for you to change your mind even the smallest bit, while being shown wrong outright is something you can simply ignore.

Yea, but I don't post what my connclusions are if he's right...

Frazzled wrote:

Funny how it requires a slight (but meaningless) concession by someone you agree with for you to change your mind even the smallest bit, while being shown wrong outright is something you can simply ignore.

Yea, but I don't post what my connclusions are if he's right...

Aren't you previously stated to want to just nuke them and leave? Not that thats an effective solution.

ShumaGorath wrote:
What is a "technological solution"?

Probably scanner technology. The idea is that, once airports becomes largely secure, the onus shifts to other large, public venues (malls, stadiums, etc.).

dogma wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
What is a "technological solution"?

Probably scanner technology. The idea is that, once airports becomes largely secure, the onus shifts to other large, public venues (malls, stadiums, etc.).

Or just airports. They're pretty packed, and all those big lines are nice targets.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Or just airports. They're pretty packed, and all those big lines are nice targets.

Yeah, honestly, I'm not sure why it hasn't happened yet. You can pack a lot of explosives into a rolling suitcase, and the psychological effect of being attacked just outside the security measures in place to prevent such incidents would probably be at least as significant as the same event on a plane.