SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
For the first time in 10 years, the Prime Minister said the terror threat had been raised to the highest possible level, from severe to critical, meaning an attack is "expected imminently".
[...] Mrs May also announced that troops would replace police officers at set-piece events including sports venues and concerts.
It will be the first time since 2003 – when the Government reacted to a plot to bring down an airliner – that troops are deployed on the streets.
[...] It is the first time Britain has been on maximum terrorist alert since 2007, when a blazing car loaded with gas canisters was driven into Glasgow Airport.
Source: The Telegraph
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Soldiers Deployed in UK as Threat Level Raised to Critical
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 209 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Don't despise your poor relations, they may become suddenly rich one day.
-- Josh Billings
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday May 24 2017, @04:29PM (5 children)
Stop letting terrorists WIN and they'll stop. If nobody pays attention to them then their whole motive goes away. This is an extreme adult version of a child having tantrums to get it's way.
I'm sorry, this one is just stupid. You can't convince the population to just ignore a mass bombing where dozens are killed or injured. What do you expect people to do? "Oh well, our daughter was at the XYZ concert last night and got blown up, but it's no big deal, there's a great show coming TV tonight!" Any functional society is naturally going to react strongly to such events; that's the whole reason terrorism works so well. No one sane is just going to stand by and suggest "let's not bother doing anything differently" when wackos are blowing people up by the dozens or hundreds.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 24 2017, @04:43PM
It is a big deal, but it doesn't justify retribution on anyone besides the perpetrators. Leverage the entire UN military might agaisny any suspected conspirators, watch the assholes crumble. This dream only works if we do NOT persecute entire nations or ethnic / religious groups for the sins of a few.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday May 24 2017, @04:52PM
No, but you can start with the news ignoring every single asshole who threatens the West when he has a bad harem day.
Stop talking about every battle in Iraq/Syria as if the fundamentalists mattered, and disconnect them from the internet faster, including no propaganda videos on bloody Youtube.
Don't let them reach lowlifes in the West, who have a revenge to take on society for both the active discriminations they are subjected to, and their own failings.
Withhold names from official news, and call the bomber "useless disposable asshole #213" instead, including when interviewing his family and friends.
ISIS is a bunch of guys in pickups who took over an area where the majority was their sect-mates being oppressed by the US-approved government. It should have never been more than that, and the Western Media and Internet companies are over 90% responsible for what happened next.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday May 24 2017, @05:09PM (1 child)
I agree that you can't just ignore these things. BUT I do think we also need to seriously consider media culpability in encouraging terrorist events. For example, we've seen a number of "terrorist" incidents in the past few years that seem to fall under the "depressed loner" category, e.g., Muslim guy who hasn't really been practicing religion for years and previously didn't seem to care much about Islam at all suddenly goes out and shoots a bunch of people or runs over them with a truck or whatever.
Why? Of COURSE ISIS/ISIL is going to claim credit for all such things, but in a number of cases only flimsy evidence has been uncovered to connect a lot of the origin of attacks back to some evil centralized network. Given the high media profile we give to terrorist events, I think we run a real chance of giving suicidal loners a chance to "give their death meaning" rather than simply offing themselves with a gun in their apartment. If you're already depressed enough and hate the world, why not "go out with a bang" and become a "martyr" for something? Studies show that lone wolf [pbs.org] attacks are on the rise and becoming worse -- these are people who may claim a political motivation, but they're also more likely to have personal grievances and a history of mental illness.
But that doesn't fit the political fear narrative. We don't want to have to contemplate a world with random deranged depressed people killing crowds. So it's easier to attribute the attack to some larger evil identifiable motive or organization... which then paradoxically feeds into the "martyr" rhetoric that could motivate the next depressed loner to suddenly "find religion" rather than just shooting himself in the head.
I don't know what the solution is to this. But I do think there's a potentially dangerous feedback loop.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday May 25 2017, @05:35AM
Wanna slow them down? Make 'em take a pay cut [indiatimes.com].
Like so many things, it really is strictly business. That trail is far more intriguing than all this religious mumbo-jumbo.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday May 24 2017, @08:50PM
I think that's what the Brits don't get, 75 years ago they were getting blown up, they had the right idea about the stiff upper lip and carry on and all that, but they were more or less doing "something" about it, which is different from the current "lay back and enjoy it" victim blaming.