Has the war on terror gone too far?

Linkex said:
The problem with it is the people making the mistakes are not the people who will be punished - those in power when the revolution comes will be put up agasint the wall, but those in power now will not be, which is a shame, because it will have been thier fault.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about that, people have long memories, especially now that every little thing is being recorded.

Linkex said:
more people die on the roads, and yet we can still drive.
Click to expand...

Careful now, lets not give them any ideas.
 
Your chances of being caught up in a terrorist explosion now are probably a good deal less than in the 1970's.

Your chances of being blown up in the street are far less than winning the lottery.
 
Nitefly said:
Getting the balance between fundemental rights and the protection of liberty is always going to be tricky. I don't believe in any 'mind control' or that any underhand politics are going on in this regard, but some of the terrorism laws enacted circa 2006 are pretty scary.
Click to expand...

Same, it's not some big conspiracy. It's just humans over reacting.
The no charge laws need to be ripped up.
 
Many draconian anti-terror laws were introduced by that maniac Tony Blair and the Labour Government, I think that is universally agreed.
 
The war on terror... seriously?.

Just the name wreaks of scaremongering tactics.

How about we recognise that our foreign policy is what's increasing the chances of being bombed, not because they "hate us for our freedom".

While I agree we need some intelligent anti-terrorism laws, the kind of power the government has now (thanks to Labour) will be very unlikely to want to give up any time soon.
 
Its just a load of rubbish to pass controlling laws, I stopped reading the news ages ago now, its utter tripe, my life is much better without the fictional media. I still hear about 'events of interest {if there is such a thing}' from friends, so i'm not missing anything.
 
mmj_uk said:
It still amuses me that the so called 'terrorists' target public transport and primarily aeroplanes which are like fort knox to infiltrate, if they were truly out to terrorise us they would be targetting daily sporting events with thousands of people present or doing something along the lines of the Washington snipers... who caused statewide chaos for weeks with just a car & a rifle.
Click to expand...
Terrorists don't go after soft targets like shopping centres and the water supply because they aren't interested in killing for the sake of it and couldn't care less about terrorising the public. Attacks are normally either a message to the government (e.g. the IRA's bombing campaign against English financial centres in the 90s) or a show of strength to supporters (9/11 is a good example - Al Qaeda's goal was demonstrating America's vulnerability to Muslims, not killing a lot of Americans - Bin Laden was actually surprised that the towers collapsed).
 
jas72 said:
This is why Scotland should become independent and then we get to keep 10% of that figure. 5 billion should be enough 1000 quid for every man woman and child in the country. Should be enough to buy an independence vote?
:p
Click to expand...

and once you'd spent all the money we can invade, take all your oil and turn you into slaves :D
 
groen said:
Military budgets have increased consistently.

ukgs_line.php
Click to expand...

Oh dear........fail is strong in this one.
 
It's a vicious circle.
They started rebelling because they felt oppressed.
The coalition responded to violence with more violence which angered them meaning they used more violence meaning the coalition responded with more violence, ...
You see where I am going with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom