Events which are perfect for terrorist attacks? page 2

64 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Good lord, what kind horrendous accusations are these.
I knew you people were liars, but never knew you were this much of liars.
Now I will have to ‘use my fists, shoot you or blow you up.’
Vika your words smell racist. you should be ashamed of accusing a man of such deeds.

This from the man, who just a matter of months ago, told me if we had been discussing in RL he would have broken my jaw by now? Or for that matter from the individual who used to keep a celebratory running total of every American soldier who died in afghanistan, until the thread was ah, locked a bit?

Americans are still lucky that no one targeted there bus stands or train stations, unlike us.

Meh, its happened before, to most Western countries. The larger ones tend to take precautions. The smaller ones, it wouldn’t be worth it for anyone to hit, so they don’t bother so much.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Good lord, what kind horrendous accusations are these.
I knew you people were liars, but never knew you were this much of liars.
Now I will have to ‘use my fists, shoot you or blow you up.’
Vika your words smell racist. you should be ashamed of accusing a man of such deeds.

This from the man, who just a matter of months ago, told me if we had been discussing in RL he would have broken my jaw by now? Or for that matter from the individual who used to keep a celebratory running total of every American soldier who died in afghanistan, until the thread was ah, locked a bit?

Americans are still lucky that no one targeted there bus stands or train stations, unlike us.

Meh, its happened before, to most Western countries. The larger ones tend to take precautions. The smaller ones, it wouldn’t be worth it for anyone to hit, so they don’t bother so much.

go, and read that post again, I asked you about a scenario i had with another person
This is the exact quote

If you are a mod will you consider this intimidating.

A guy was trolling

I interrupted him

He said What you gonna do about it?

I said

In real life I would have hacked your jaw off…
and then I told you

and I said"I COULD have hacked your jaw off"(I wrote it wrong before)
COULD as in meaning of I CAN not I WILL or I SHALL.
A huge difference there is between CAN DO and WILL DO

As for causalities tally, I did it cuz it pissed off many people.
and why should not I? given their drones kill my country men.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

No. I don’t think multicuturalism is bad, hell, Pakistan has its own multiculturalism but what I am saying is that the crowd forming events are in plenty, so are the oppertiunities for a terrorrist.

And I’m asking if crowd forming events aren’t numerous in other countries, because the way you phrase it makes it sound like it is something that is special to the US.

Are you arguing that other countries have multiculturalism too, but it’s only in the US that it causes crowds?

Americans are still lucky that no one targeted there bus stands or train stations, unlike us.

So you have too damn many bus stands and train stations?

Yeah I assumed that you were an american.

Why?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

No. I don’t think multicuturalism is bad, hell, Pakistan has its own multiculturalism but what I am saying is that the crowd forming events are in plenty, so are the oppertiunities for a terrorrist.

And I’m asking if crowd forming events aren’t numerous in other countries, because the way you phrase it makes it sound like it is something that is special to the US.

Are you arguing that other countries have multiculturalism too, but it’s only in the US that it causes crowds?

Americans are still lucky that no one targeted there bus stands or train stations, unlike us.

So you have too damn many bus stands and train stations?

Yeah I assumed that you were an american.

Why?

Why I feel that you feel offended?
You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.
Every country have train and bus stations, its just that terrorrists only get a chance to bloe them up as they are relativly soft targets.
I assumed you were an american because this is an american site and obviously americans will be in plenty here.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Every country have train and bus stations, its just that terrorrists only get a chance to bloe them up as they are relativly soft targets.

Well yes, its just a pole sticking out of the concrete. There’s not exactly much to blow up. A street lamp would be a harder target than a bus stop.

But its not only terrorists who have the chance to blow them up. Any loon can. Or they can just tie a rope round it, lash it to their tow bar and drive off – same effect.

I assumed you were an american because this is an american site and obviously americans will be in plenty here.

By that assumption, obviously you are an American too, right? I mean, American site and all.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Every country have train and bus stations, its just that terrorrists only get a chance to bloe them up as they are relativly soft targets.

Well yes, its just a pole sticking out of the concrete. There’s not exactly much to blow up. A street lamp would be a harder target than a bus stop.

But its not only terrorists who have the chance to blow them up. Any loon can. Or they can just tie a rope round it, lash it to their tow bar and drive off – same effect.

I assumed you were an american because this is an american site and obviously americans will be in plenty here.

By that assumption, obviously you are an American too, right? I mean, American site and all.

Why you take every thing so literaly?
By soft target I meant that it is not as heavily guarded as parades etc.
I said in plenty not all of them.

 
Flag Post

I take it as you say it. If you don’t wish for it to be taken that way, try not saying it that way.

And yes, it is true that metal poles sticking out of the concrete are not typically heavily guarded. What would be the point? Do you have people guarding every street lamp and street sign where you come from?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

I take it as you say it. If you don’t wish for it to be taken that way, try not saying it that way.

And yes, it is true that metal poles sticking out of the concrete are not typically heavily guarded. What would be the point? Do you have people guarding every street lamp and street sign where you come from?

When they attack a train station or bus station, its not the structures they are after, its the lives of people who are waiting there for travel, and there are usually above 100 people on such places.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Why I feel that you feel offended?

Probably because you seem to be assuming things a lot.

You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.

That doesn’t really answer anything though.

Every country have train and bus stations, its just that terrorrists only get a chance to bloe them up as they are relativly soft targets.

Wouldn’t they be easy targets in the US as well? Or does the US protect their bus stops, but says “screw it” when it comes to security in large crowd gatherings?

I assumed you were an american because this is an american site and obviously americans will be in plenty here.


That’s not a good reason to assume I’m american.

Why you take every thing so literaly?

Because assuming things that aren’t written out means you’ll be wrong most of the time.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

When they attack a train station or bus station, its not the structures they are after, its the lives of people who are waiting there for travel, and there are usually above 100 people on such places.

Maybe in your country, there are hundreds of people waiting by every bus stop up and down the country, camped out there. Homeless maybe?

It is not the same in every country. Here, if you blow up a dozen bus stops, you might get a couple of OAPs, and a student or two. Most will be so far from the pole, that they’ll get a good view of it exploding, but nothing more than that.

You blow up a train station, then you bugger up the train service on that line. You might if you are lucky kill fifteen or sixteen people, and get your ugly mug recorded on 30 or 40 security cameras. Really sounds like an excellent profit/loss situation.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Why I feel that you feel offended?

Probably because you seem to be assuming things a lot.

You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.

That doesn’t really answer anything though.

Every country have train and bus stations, its just that terrorrists only get a chance to bloe them up as they are relativly soft targets.

Wouldn’t they be easy targets in the US as well? Or does the US protect their bus stops, but says “screw it” when it comes to security in large crowd gatherings?

I assumed you were an american because this is an american site and obviously americans will be in plenty here.


That’s not a good reason to assume I’m american.


Why you take every thing so literaly?


Because assuming things that aren’t written out means you’ll be wrong most of the time.


I’ll let rest of your BS slide and just address your third point
and the answer is, USA has relativly better seciurty because of a composition of factors.
Namely,
Their agencies,
their global network,
their isolation from hot beds of terrorism.(i.e their tighter visa controls etc)
and lack of home grown terrorists.
On the other hand,
WE are smack in the middle of war against terrorrism.
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
and the answer is, USA has relativly better seciurty because of a composition of factors.
Namely,
Their agencies,
their global network,
their isolation from hot beds of terrorism.
and lack of home grown terrorists.

Prove these claims, please. A couple of them I can already tell are complete bullshit – such as the lack of home-grown terrorists. The Army of God and the Klan spring to mind immediately. There are dozens if not hundreds of other groups.

So expand on your claims and justify them.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

When they attack a train station or bus station, its not the structures they are after, its the lives of people who are waiting there for travel, and there are usually above 100 people on such places.

Maybe in your country, there are hundreds of people waiting by every bus stop up and down the country, camped out there. Homeless maybe?

It is not the same in every country. Here, if you blow up a dozen bus stops, you might get a couple of OAPs, and a student or two. Most will be so far from the pole, that they’ll get a good view of it exploding, but nothing more than that.

You blow up a train station, then you bugger up the train service on that line. You might if you are lucky kill fifteen or sixteen people, and get your ugly mug recorded on 30 or 40 security cameras. Really sounds like an excellent profit/loss situation.

Actually there really do hundereds of people waiting on the bus stops waiting for the buses at rush hour.
Then come the inter city bus stops, with hundereds waiting for hours, they look like airports at times because of the crowds.
Same with thr train stations.
Remember, whole world is not like west, our principal way of travelling is Bus and Train, unlike aeroplanes.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
and the answer is, USA has relativly better seciurty because of a composition of factors.
Namely,
Their agencies,
their global network,
their isolation from hot beds of terrorism.
and lack of home grown terrorists.

Prove these claims, please. A couple of them I can already tell are complete bullshit – such as the lack of home-grown terrorists. The Army of God and the Klan spring to mind immediately. There are dozens if not hundreds of other groups.

So expand on your claims and justify them.

But not as many groups as there are in Pakistan.
and When was the last time KKK or AOG commited terrorism?
Any ways situation is getting better in pakistan and groups are surrendering one by one.

 
Flag Post

That wasn’t what you claimed. Please do not try to shift the goalposts.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
I’ll let rest of your BS slide and just address your third point

Exactly what in my post was BS?

Is the fact that you assume a lot of things BS? So far you’ve assumed that I’m american and that I’m offended.

Does english being your third language answer anything? If it does, explain what it answers, as I honestly have no clue.

Are you sincerely saying that because this site is american, you should without question be able to assume that everyone you speak to is american? Quite narrow minded, seeing how you’re not american yourself.

So far the things you’ve assumed about me are that I’m american and that I’m offended. Both are wrong. Still want to claim that assuming things make you right most of the time?

and the answer is, USA has relativly better seciurty because of a composition of factors.
Namely,
Their agencies,
their global network,
their isolation from hot beds of terrorism.(i.e their tighter visa controls etc)
and lack of home grown terrorists.
On the other hand,
WE are smack in the middle of war against terrorrism.

You originally said that the US has too many crowds, and that guns and whatnot are very easy to come by. Now, apparently the US has this awesome security network that protects them from terrorist attacks. Doesn’t that mean that having crowds and guns doesn’t really matter?

 
Flag Post

The only way we are going to get a handle on such ‘terrorist’ attacks is to be able to detect and track any of these compounds as they move about our cities. That means explosives, propellants and biological agents alike. As part of doing that we must of course track everyone as they move about.

The real trick is to do so without infringing on civil liberties. If we start down that path, we start creating a culture of fear and the terrorists win by default. We need to strive to create an overwatch that can pick up on the transport of harmful material, determine when that use is actually legitimate, and when it is likely to be malicious and respond accordingly, whilst all the while ensuring that most people can go about their day – doing whatever strikes their fancy – completely unmolested.

Such a system is not going to be easy to achieve, putting it mildly.

It would however, completely negate the effectiveness of terror campaigns as an effective weapon by fringe groups.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
I’ll let rest of your BS slide and just address your third point

Exactly what in my post was BS?

Is the fact that you assume a lot of things BS? So far you’ve assumed that I’m american and that I’m offended.

Does english being your third language answer anything? If it does, explain what it answers, as I honestly have no clue.

If you are dumb enough to not under stand my post, then what can I do?


Are you sincerely saying that because this site is american, you should without question be able to assume that everyone you speak to is american? Quite narrow minded, seeing how you’re not american yourself.


So far the things you’ve assumed about me are that I’m american and that I’m offended. Both are wrong. Still want to claim that assuming things make you right most of the time?


and the answer is, USA has relativly better seciurty because of a composition of factors.
Namely,
Their agencies,
their global network,
their isolation from hot beds of terrorism.(i.e their tighter visa controls etc)
and lack of home grown terrorists.
On the other hand,
WE are smack in the middle of war against terrorrism.


You originally said that the US has too many crowds, and that guns and whatnot are very easy to come by. Now, apparently the US has this awesome security network that protects them from terrorist attacks. Doesn’t that mean that having crowds and guns doesn’t really matter?

What USA has, is a way to keep terrorrisrts out, but if one sneaks in, he is in a terrorist heaven with ample oppertunities.

Originally posted by vikaTae:

The only way we are going to get a handle on such ‘terrorist’ attacks is to be able to detect and track any of these compounds as they move about our cities. That means explosives, propellants and biological agents alike. As part of doing that we must of course track everyone as they move about.

The real trick is to do so without infringing on civil liberties. If we start down that path, we start creating a culture of fear and the terrorists win by default. We need to strive to create an overwatch that can pick up on the transport of harmful material, determine when that use is actually legitimate, and when it is likely to be malicious and respond accordingly, whilst all the while ensuring that most people can go about their day – doing whatever strikes their fancy – completely unmolested.

Such a system is not going to be easy to achieve, putting it mildly.

It would however, completely negate the effectiveness of terror campaigns as an effective weapon by fringe groups.

I can’t do anything other than agreeing with this.
But I really doubt any such system can be created with out infringing civil liberties or at least some of them.
Remember, there are not only blasts, but shootings can also be commited.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

If you are dumb enough to not under stand my post, then what can I do?

You can explain where I’m wrong. Going ad hominem on me isn’t helping your argument at all. If I’m so dumb, you should be able to decunstruct my arguments easily.

What USA has, is a way to keep terrorrisrts out, but if one sneaks in, he is in a terrorist heaven with ample oppertunities.

How is that different from any other country? Again, don’t other countries form crowds?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

If you are dumb enough to not under stand my post, then what can I do?

You can explain where I’m wrong. Going ad hominem on me isn’t helping your argument at all. If I’m so dumb, you should be able to decunstruct my arguments easily.

What USA has, is a way to keep terrorrisrts out, but if one sneaks in, he is in a terrorist heaven with ample oppertunities.

How is that different from any other country? Again, don’t other countries form crowds?

I will urge you to re read my posts and reread them thoroughly as I really don’t like to repeat myself.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

I will urge you to re read my posts and reread them thoroughly as I really don’t like to repeat myself.

I’m not asking you to repeat yourself, I’m asking you to clarify. There’s a big difference.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

I will urge you to re read my posts and reread them thoroughly as I really don’t like to repeat myself.

I’m not asking you to repeat yourself, I’m asking you to clarify. There’s a big difference.

you said

And I’m asking if crowd forming events aren’t numerous in other countries, because the way you phrase it makes it sound like it is something that is special to the US.

I said
You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.

and you falsley assumed that
Are you saying that multiculturalism is bad and should be avoided?

before that…..
Screw it……………….

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

you said

And I’m asking if crowd forming events aren’t numerous in other countries, because the way you phrase it makes it sound like it is something that is special to the US.


I said

You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.

and you falsley assumed that
Are you saying that multiculturalism is bad and should be avoided?

before that…..
Screw it……………….

Having English as a third language still doesn’t explain anything. Perhaps it means that your point didn’t come across like you wanted it to, but the solution to that problem isn’t to call people dumb, especially since you basically just admitted to having poor English skills.


You made the claim that America forms too damn many crowds, and that it’s a problem when it comes to terrorism. You pinpointed America, which made me ask if other countries don’t form crowds. You then said that America form more crowds, and that it’s because America is a multicultural nation. I asked if you thought multiculturalism is bad, because it causes crowds which is bad. You said no, fair enough, but you then went on to say that Pakistan also is multicultural. Either that means that Pakistan also has too damn many crowds, or that multiculturalism is only causing crowds in America. I asked you about that, but you dodged the question by pretending I’m offended.


After that, you called BS on all of my points in order to avoid answering them, and when I called you out on it you went ad hominem on me to further avoid them. You say I should reread your posts, but it won’t matter how many times I reread them when the answers aren’t there. That’s why you need to clarify, not just copy and paste meaningless parts of your previous posts.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

you said

And I’m asking if crowd forming events aren’t numerous in other countries, because the way you phrase it makes it sound like it is something that is special to the US.


I said

You should know that english is my third language(not even second) so I phrase the sentences as I know them best.


and you falsley assumed that

Are you saying that multiculturalism is bad and should be avoided?

before that…..
Screw it……………….

Having English as a third language still doesn’t explain anything. Perhaps it means that your point didn’t come across like you wanted it to, but the solution to that problem isn’t to call people dumb, especially since you basically just admitted to having poor English skills.


You made the claim that America forms too damn many crowds, and that it’s a problem when it comes to terrorism. You pinpointed America, which made me ask if other countries don’t form crowds. You then said that America form more crowds, and that it’s because America is a multicultural nation. I asked if you thought multiculturalism is bad, because it causes crowds which is bad. You said no, fair enough, but you then went on to say that Pakistan also is multicultural. Either that means that Pakistan also has too damn many crowds, or that multiculturalism is only causing crowds in America. I asked you about that, but you dodged the question by pretending I’m offended.


After that, you called BS on all of my points in order to avoid answering them, and when I called you out on it you went ad hominem on me to further avoid them. You say I should reread your posts, but it won’t matter how many times I reread them when the answers aren’t there. That’s why you need to clarify, not just copy and paste meaningless parts of your previous posts.


Pakistan is too much multicultural too, but we don’t have that much festivals because we mainly have same religion.
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Pakistan is too much multicultural too, but we don’t have that much festivals because we mainly have same religion.

How much multiculturalism is too much? And why is there such a thing as too much?

To get back on the issue of crowds. Why would an abundance of crowds influence the probability that one of them will be hit by terrorists? Has there ever been a documented case of a person not commiting a terrorist act simply because he felt there weren’t enough crowds around?