Vegas incident V Somali incident...

Somalia has been a hotbed of civil war and violence for decades. Las Vegas is a party town people from all over the world go to have fun.

One is not as much as a shock as the other.
 
So do we. We even celebrate it.


Can you cite the UK currently holding captive ten hostages as a result of maritime piracy at this present moment? Or a history post the year 2000 of umpteen murderous attacks and robbery on civilian and commercial vessels by UK citizens in UK waters? Ransom demands under threat (and the actual carrying out) of murder of hostages to piracy? Celebrated or not? ;)
 
Back to the OP, I read this story on the BBC, it was mentioned on BBC breakfast where they covered it by starting with 'many other outlets not covering this yet but... SOmalia has experienced the worst terrorist attack worldwide for many years'
Then spoke a bit about it and moved along.

Somalia is a lawless wilderness outside of the main city from all accounts.
Al Shbab continue their insurgency to bring about their apocalypse.
Many people die in such a mess, and frankly as it is far away and we have no vested interest in the wasteland, they don't report it as anything but a footnote.

Issue is, we should be doing more, and care more, because if they win, and prevail, they will progress outwards in greater numbers than they already do, that should be of concern.
 
Getting killed in one of the most popular tourist destinations and greatest city in the world, vs getting killed in an area where you'd fully expect to be killed? I wonder why.
 
Intervention in 3rd world country without an explicit government request is just as dangerous.

Yes. Quite.
Then we provide 'aid', monetary aid, spent paying our mercs and killteams to do little bits of good here and there, while the US **** around with drone strikes without caring what collateral future aggression they cause.
 
Honestly mate don’t bother engaging in a debate with him, not worth the time or effort. You could present all the facts in the world to him but he will still shove his head in the sand and believe what he believes.

Admirable?? Maybe?? I have no problem with someone sticking to their views but when hard evidence is shown and proves them wrong then that’s where I find it amusing that people of his ilk still won’t change their views v

Irony, meet Yas. Yas meet irony...

ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.
 
It's completely obvious why those 2 incidents are different. One is in a highly developed 1st world country with extensive media coverage that also speaks English (the same language we do) and is also one of the most popular tourist destinations in the world, and the other is a 3rd world country that has huge problems with active terrorist groups, crime, violence and murder. The government infact advise against all travel to Somalia for numerous reasons https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/somalia
 
Last edited:
A few weeks ago a thread was created here about the Vegas incident. It went to over 50 pages (most of which was discussion about the weapons used)

Yet after an incident where far more people died in a huge bomb blast (230 lives lost), there is little to no coverage. Even the front page of the BBC website only covers what happened in Somalia at the bottom of the page.

In your opinion, why do we treat these two acts of terrorism in totally different ways?

Somalia is a third world nation, which has been in a state of civil war since 2009. We expect such acts during wartime; they are less shocking precisely because they occur at a time when wholescale violence and slaughter has become part of daily life.

We are more shocked at a senseless murder during a time of peace, in a first world nation, with no discernable rationale.
 
A few weeks ago a thread was created here about the Vegas incident. It went to over 50 pages (most of which was discussion about the weapons used)

Yet after an incident where far more people died in a huge bomb blast (230 lives lost), there is little to no coverage. Even the front page of the BBC website only covers what happened in Somalia at the bottom of the page.

In your opinion, why do we treat these two acts of terrorism in totally different ways?

One in a relatively peaceful civilized country, another in a poor war torn county still run by warlords.
 
It's Somalia.

Who gives a ****?
Lets be fair though, I'm sure people in Somalia think exactly the same about events here, or America.


Issue is, we should be doing more, and care more, because if they win, and prevail, they will progress outwards in greater numbers than they already do, that should be of concern.


If we did, we would be labeled the bad guys and any following attacks would be blamed on our meddling.
 
If we did, we would be labeled the bad guys and any following attacks would be blamed on our meddling.

No the US with their drones strikes would be.
If a load of random guys turn up shot in the head in one place, then another group elsewhere, they blame it on infighting, and infight more.
This wouldn't be any sort of sanctioned campaign.
We wouldn't announce such mess, you just do it, as it is a lawless wasteland anyway, no one really cares.
 
Getting killed in one of the most popular tourist destinations and greatest city in the world, vs getting killed in an area where you'd fully expect to be killed? I wonder why.


Lol.

A bit like how "Man shot during street robbery in Milford, Surrey" would attract rather more media attention than "Man shot during street robbery in Brixton, London" :p
 
Lol.

A bit like how "Man shot during street robbery in Milford, Surrey" would attract rather more media attention than "Man shot during street robbery in Brixton, London" :p

Yeah. The media always focuses more when they speak the same language as us.
 
Back
Top Bottom