What happened in london?

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

indiscriminate bombing designed to kill as many people as possible
Click to expand...

i disagree with that tbh. Sorry if the below paragraph is offensive to anyone but im trying to explain a point.



If they had wanted to do serious damage they would have attacked live8. Just imagine a suicide bomber in a crowd that big. Doesnt bear thinking about. Or even if they had planted two bombs at the station. Detonted a small bomb first to draw all the emergency services then detonate a larger one while they are there .... horrible. The bombs they used were terribl and obviously did alot of damage but it could have been alot worse if they wanted it to be imo.
 
I dont think it's offensive what you said.

Yes they could of targeted more high profile events, Live8 or the celebrations of the Olympic bid in Trafalgar Square. But it would've been less likely to succeed since security was extremely tight around those events and a attack would have been taken into consideration. People would have worried about gathering in large numbers for gigs or celebrating in public.

The extremeists have targeted the transport systems which essentially have little or no security against terrorism. Attacking this way is designed to install fear in people everytime they get on a bus or a train every single day, rather than just really big and rare occasions which might happen every year or so. It attacks the heart of our society rather than just a single event.

My point about indiscriminate bombing is that it was done at the rush hour, arguable the busiest possible time, when there was the opportunity for maximum media coverage and attention. It also caused severe disruption to everyone in London on that day. Blowing 200,000+ people up at Live8 would not cause the same disruption or make people as afraid I don't personally think. It would of been a bigger atrocity - but would've had less psychological impact upon the general population.

Indeed it could of being significantly worse for fatalities, or if the worst case scenario was that a biological attack happened at the same time. But the more complicated it is, the more chance there is of it being stopped or it going wrong. London was sent an extremely well timed message which might not have had the same impact upon us on any other day.

I personally think that the attacks were quite poor, they weren't clever or well orchestrated. Hijacking planes and flying them for miles to crash them into high profile targets is clever and well planned, takes more execution to carry out. Simply blowing yourself or something up on a train or bus is pretty dumb-skulled.

Thats my perspective anyway.
 
Bomb scare outside my house this morning all the roads cordoned off we were evacuated. we had the bomb squad and that remote controlled rover thing in our street . apparently a bomb threat to the law courts and the train station at the end of our road ... fs
and it did make me fearful of getting on the train and going into the main station in Birmingham.... so its had its effect.
 
Yeah it is pretty dumb skilled. Also interesting to see the trend of doing things in the morning, obviously to get a full days worth of media coverage... makes you wonder even if these 'extremists' are doing it for their whacky religious beliefs anyway, or just for some kind of psychological festish with doing something which can bring a city to it's knees.
 
Just some speculation:
After they hit New York, the world went after Bin Laden, Afghanistan was turned upside down, and now Iraq has been too.

Today, people are saying that Iran is a threat and that they possess everything we thought Iraq did, including relations with Al Qaeda and Weapons of Mass Destruction...

After all this, we have another terrorist attack that will surely see us going after Al Qaeda again, and that almost certainly means Iran.

Could it be that Al Quaeda are playing us all into eliminating all the significant forces in the middle east for some reason?
 
i think the "low" bodycount is cos of the fact that most strikes in europe seem to be done by idealistic youngsters who have been recruited for the jihad. The organisation part was done well (if you can say that without offending people) but they clearly used small bombs on wrong places. Normally Al Qaeda dont claim responsiblity at all now they did. We have such a group in the netherlands called the hofstadt group, although they did assisinate van gogh it is becoming evident now that they were funded / recruited by a larger group above them.

I think the orginal intention was to kill as many as possible but due to too small bombs and the fact that london police shut down mobile phone network the ammount of explosions has been limited. ( they often use mobile phone to trigger the explosion).
 
i totaly agree to what martz says... it aint hard to walk in with a backpack and blow it up by a simple click.. BUT.. if it was Al Qaeda(do you c us all writing that with capitals btw.. as if it is God) why wouldent they kill more? they wont lose anything with it do they.. if theyd kill 50.. or 100 or 200 what would it matter for them? so i was thinking.. maybe they are using this as what they think looks like a "litle warning" but what we c as a big attack?
 
Warchild said:
(do you c us all writing that with capitals btw.. as if it is God)
Click to expand...

Almost as if names are meant to be capitalised.... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well the day after has been like a warzone..

police everywhere patrolling armed police around the inner city area, MILLION'S OF SODDING SHOPPERS.

and a fair few "bomb scares" all over london today.
 
Paa` said:
police everywhere patrolling armed police around the inner city area
Click to expand...

I never really understood why they shove security everywhere immediately after such an event, and then lower the restrictions gradually as time passes - since the likelyhood of another attack in such a short space of time is next to none. The chance increases as time goes by, so why are things done the opposite way around as to what would be logical?
 
Humph said:
I never really understood why they shove security everywhere immediately after such an event, and then lower the restrictions gradually as time passes - since the likelyhood of another attack in such a short space of time is next to none. The chance increases as time goes by, so why are things done the opposite way around as to what would be logical?
Click to expand...
Ye olde plunderers, and maybe they wanna seem vigilant and all that shit.
 
Giving people their feeling about security back.

Video of terrorists. No clue what they say, the seem to be happy tho. They are finding out if its a new vid.
Right click, save as. 11 mb. Might go slower than u want it to go :x
 
Last edited:
humph I think they place all the police there to keep the people from panicing, to give them more of a feeling everything's gonna b alright, and of course to protect them ....

but what happened omfg it's terrible :bawling:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back