mattyrm wrote: Alright, armoured cavalry, but the point is they don't drive MBTs an MBT is a Challenger or an Abrams or something.

You can visually see the difference though, things like Scimitars and Warriors and APCs and such are far lighter and smaller than MBTs

Da Boss wrote:Any of the rioters I have seen interviewed have been totally incoherant when trying to explain why it is justified. They blame everything from rich people to immigrants. We're not talking about a politically sophisticated demographic here. Talk of it being caused by cuts and so on (I mean, caused directly) is just media spin from those parties that oppose the cuts. I mean, the government doesn't have the money for the services. We either increase taxes or cut spending. (Whole nother debate for another day.)

I don't claim to know the entire reason for the cuts, but it is my opinion that it has more to do with the policies of labour and the general attitude of many in britain with regard to social programs than anything the conservatives have done. If it was just about cuts it'd be easy to fix. It does far deeper than that, and I think in many ways it's unfixable.

Excommunicate Traitoris wrote:I'm still really surprised it hasn't all kicked off in Bradford yet. The army should deffinately have been deployed to help support the police, this government needs to stop being so damn soft on criminals. To me if you break the law of the country then you forfeit any right to be defended by that countries laws and law enforcement agencies. So you choose to loot a shop, a police officer or damn it even owner of said shop chooses to smash your skull in, well tough you have no recourse. This country has gone to hell in a hand basket thanks to it being continually lead by a bunch of incompetant cretins who couldn't organise a booze up in a brewery. I hope everyone is safe and that it all ends soon.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:Seems tonight is calm from all the news reports. Feel very sorry now for the parents of the 3 blokes killed in the road collision in Birmingham. BUt yeah tonight is quiet. Eltham seems to have a mild disturbance but otherwise, little going.

Looks like the worst has passed off, just as I thought actually. Riots were really bad on day 3 and the Government acted. Now it's died down so someone can cry out it was too late. Bit debateable that one.

And it's funny - me in Northamptonshire and I heard 3-4 police cars in the afternoon... which is strange since my area is so dull nothing happens ever Guess I get lucky.

Da Boss wrote:Any of the rioters I have seen interviewed have been totally incoherant when trying to explain why it is justified. They blame everything from rich people to immigrants. We're not talking about a politically sophisticated demographic here. Talk of it being caused by cuts and so on (I mean, caused directly) is just media spin from those parties that oppose the cuts. I mean, the government doesn't have the money for the services. We either increase taxes or cut spending. (Whole nother debate for another day.)

I don't claim to know the entire reason for the riots, but it is my opinion that it has more to do with the policies of labour and the general attitude of many in britain with regard to social programs than anything the conservatives have done. If it was just about cuts it'd be easy to fix. It does far deeper than that, and I think in many ways it's unfixable.

Edit to add:
Well, that argument makes more sense. But the thing is, the UK spends quite a lot on social programs, and achieves very little in the way of social cohesivenes. The police are pretty soft from what I see, and life is generally pretty good for poorer people. Education is getting better all the time as well.

I feel like the biggest social problem in britain is the embeddedness of the class system. Like, it starts at 11 when kids are split off into different schools based on "ability". No 11 year old has fully developed cognitively, so that is just a bollocks reason to segregate kids and generally just propogates the class system.

Ahtman wrote:That comic is about as honest and true to life as a Jack Chick comic strip. Helps to demonize people one doesn't agree with though, I suppose.

notprop wrote:And Buster Gonad and his infeasibly large testicles, don't forget him.

What were we talking about again?

mattyrm wrote:

notprop wrote:And Buster Gonad and his infeasibly large testicles, don't forget him.

What were we talking about again?

Biffa Bacon?

darkPrince010 wrote:Oy. I think I opened a wonderful can of flaming-hate-worms...

I agree the people burning buildings/cars and looting are scumbags, and have no political motivation besides get-rich-quick and feth-the-government. It's unfortunate that they make up a large percentage of the rioters, and I hope the popo/military sort them out and stop the arson/looting.

However, the underlying cause of the riot was not profit, or anger over the death of a single crack dealer (Just like WWI was not solely caused by the death of the Archduke Ferdinand). These issues have been simmering for at least a decade, and recently inflamed by the cuts to the programs that affect them. This was not an overnight "They cut our programs, lets burn their houses" kind of thing. Other people in this thread have mentioned the L.A. Riots, and these were not only caused by the shooting of the African-American shoplifter by the Korean storeowner.

The rioting you're seeing is not an organized movement to disrupt the government and scare the populace, but rather the affected population of people in the areas rioting suddenly seeing a way to publically display their dissent (And, unfortunately in many cases, make a quick buck or perform some vandalism on those they think were screwing them). When you have an area affected by an issue and without a strong, organized community, the populations response will be chaotic and unorganized (Sorta like a... riot?).

As for the comment about other areas not rioting, if my neighborhood and all our houses are robbed, but my neighbors are not as upset about it as I am, does that de-legitimize my anger at the robbery? I'm sorry, but simply stating that "These people have no right to riot because no-one else is rioting" is complete BS. This suggests that some people opinions are of greater value than others, which devalues the person making the differing opinion.

I agree the government probably has very little room to change it's fiscal bills, but hopefully these riots will force them to possibly reconsider in the future slashing programs designed to prevent the environment that encouraged these riots in the first place.

darkPrince010 wrote:I think the most interesting line of the article was this:

"It's like the old days. It's bringing the community spirit back. Even though it's a sad way to do it, it's bringing the community together"

Although the looters have no excuse, and the rioters went overboard on the damage and destruction they caused, the core reason for the riots (Not the death of the scummy crack dealer, but the racial/socioeconomic divides and disadvatadges that have fostered this environment of outrage) is unfortunately legitimate.

While I understand the Dakkaites from the UK are understandably upset and concerned about these events, after your ruling party started cutting programs for people who need them the most, are you really that surprised that those same people are angry?

If these riots make you question the wisdom of further government cuts to people in bad socioeconomic conditions, have they achieved their base goal (Excluding the looting and excessive destruction, as stated above)?

Your government is to blame for setting up the conditions to foster events like these (As I'm sure, without changes in policy, these types of outbreaks will occur again), and while individual actions of some (Possibly many, but not all) of the rioters are reprehensible, the overall cause for the riots is really not from the rioters themselves.

The Daily Telegraph wrote:David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the entire British political class came together yesterday to denounce the rioters. They were of course right to say that the actions of these looters, arsonists and muggers were abhorrent and criminal, and that the police should be given more support.

But there was also something very phony and hypocritical about all the shock and outrage expressed in parliament. MPs spoke about the week’s dreadful events as if they were nothing to do with them.

I cannot accept that this is the case. Indeed, I believe that the criminality in our streets cannot be dissociated from the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society. The last two decades have seen a terrifying decline in standards among the British governing elite. It has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat. An almost universal culture of selfishness and greed has grown up.

It is not just the feral youth of Tottenham who have forgotten they have duties as well as rights. So have the feral rich of Chelsea and Kensington. A few years ago, my wife and I went to a dinner party in a large house in west London. A security guard prowled along the street outside, and there was much talk of the “north-south divide”, which I took literally for a while until I realised that my hosts were facetiously referring to the difference between those who lived north and south of Kensington High Street.

Most of the people in this very expensive street were every bit as deracinated and cut off from the rest of Britain as the young, unemployed men and women who have caused such terrible damage over the last few days. For them, the repellent Financial Times magazine How to Spend It is a bible. I’d guess that few of them bother to pay British tax if they can avoid it, and that fewer still feel the sense of obligation to society that only a few decades ago came naturally to the wealthy and better off.

Yet we celebrate people who live empty lives like this. A few weeks ago, I noticed an item in a newspaper saying that the business tycoon Sir Richard Branson was thinking of moving his headquarters to Switzerland. This move was represented as a potential blow to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because it meant less tax revenue.

I couldn’t help thinking that in a sane and decent world such a move would be a blow to Sir Richard, not the Chancellor. People would note that a prominent and wealthy businessman was avoiding British tax and think less of him. Instead, he has a knighthood and is widely feted. The same is true of the brilliant retailer Sir Philip Green. Sir Philip’s businesses could never survive but for Britain’s famous social and political stability, our transport system to shift his goods and our schools to educate his workers.

Yet Sir Philip, who a few years ago sent an extraordinary £1 billion dividend offshore, seems to have little intention of paying for much of this. Why does nobody get angry or hold him culpable? I know that he employs expensive tax lawyers and that everything he does is legal, but he surely faces ethical and moral questions just as much as does a young thug who breaks into one of Sir Philip’s shops and steals from it?

Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low‑paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.

A great deal has been made over the past few days of the greed of the rioters for consumer goods, not least by Rotherham MP Denis MacShane who accurately remarked, “What the looters wanted was for a few minutes to enter the world of Sloane Street consumption.” This from a man who notoriously claimed £5,900 for eight laptops. Of course, as an MP he obtained these laptops legally through his expenses.

Yesterday, the veteran Labour MP Gerald Kaufman asked the Prime Minister to consider how these rioters can be “reclaimed” by society. Yes, this is indeed the same Gerald Kaufman who submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen television.

Or take the Salford MP Hazel Blears, who has been loudly calling for draconian action against the looters. I find it very hard to make any kind of ethical distinction between Blears’s expense cheating and tax avoidance, and the straight robbery carried out by the looters.

The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor: “We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.” He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.

The tragic truth is that Mr Cameron is himself guilty of failing this test. It is scarcely six weeks since he jauntily turned up at the News International summer party, even though the media group was at the time subject to not one but two police investigations. Even more notoriously, he awarded a senior Downing Street job to the former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, even though he knew at the time that Coulson had resigned after criminal acts were committed under his editorship. The Prime Minister excused his wretched judgment by proclaiming that “everybody deserves a second chance”. It was very telling yesterday that he did not talk of second chances as he pledged exemplary punishment for the rioters and looters.

These double standards from Downing Street are symptomatic of widespread double standards at the very top of our society. It should be stressed that most people (including, I know, Telegraph readers) continue to believe in honesty, decency, hard work, and putting back into society at least as much as they take out.

But there are those who do not. Certainly, the so-called feral youth seem oblivious to decency and morality. But so are the venal rich and powerful – too many of our bankers, footballers, wealthy businessmen and politicians.

Of course, most of them are smart and wealthy enough to make sure that they obey the law. That cannot be said of the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days. But the rioters have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society. Let’s bear in mind that many of the youths in our inner cities have never been trained in decent values. All they have ever known is barbarism. Our politicians and bankers, in sharp contrast, tend to have been to good schools and universities and to have been given every opportunity in life.

Something has gone horribly wrong in Britain. If we are ever to confront the problems which have been exposed in the past week, it is essential to bear in mind that they do not only exist in inner-city housing estates.

The culture of greed and impunity we are witnessing on our TV screens stretches right up into corporate boardrooms and the Cabinet. It embraces the police and large parts of our media. It is not just its damaged youth, but Britain itself that needs a moral reformation.

darkPrince010 wrote:So what caused the riots then? Were thousands of people suddenly in the streets vandalizing and stealing simply because a cop shot an (un?)armed crack dealer, and no underlying reasons at all? Sir, I call bull gak on that as well.

The rioters who are stealing/looting are base individuals. At no point will I deny they're scum-of-the-earth. The crimes they commit are their own responsibility and no-one else's. But the question is why they're lacking in moral scruples and guidelines that would normally prevent this behavior?

Jean Luc Picard wrote:The economics of the future is somewhat different. You see, money doesn't exist in the 24th century. The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.

Da Boss wrote:Any of the rioters I have seen interviewed have been totally incoherant when trying to explain why it is justified. They blame everything from rich people to immigrants. We're not talking about a politically sophisticated demographic here. Talk of it being caused by cuts and so on (I mean, caused directly) is just media spin from those parties that oppose the cuts. I mean, the government doesn't have the money for the services. We either increase taxes or cut spending. (Whole nother debate for another day.)

I don't claim to know the entire reason for the riots, but it is my opinion that it has more to do with the policies of labour and the general attitude of many in britain with regard to social programs than anything the conservatives have done. If it was just about cuts it'd be easy to fix. It does far deeper than that, and I think in many ways it's unfixable.

Edit to add:
Well, that argument makes more sense. But the thing is, the UK spends quite a lot on social programs, and achieves very little in the way of social cohesivenes. The police are pretty soft from what I see, and life is generally pretty good for poorer people. Education is getting better all the time as well.

I feel like the biggest social problem in britain is the embeddedness of the class system. Like, it starts at 11 when kids are split off into different schools based on "ability". No 11 year old has fully developed cognitively, so that is just a bollocks reason to segregate kids and generally just propogates the class system.