Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

CNN: Truck strikes cyclists in Manhattan, up to 6 dead


Spaceman Spiff

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Well...

 

1.  It doesn’t incite fear.

2.  There isn’t any overt meaning in the killing.

3.  He didn’t really kill very many people.

 

This is just your standard crazy person driving a vehicle through a crowd.

 

Personally, I’m more afraid of sending my children to school or attending a game or concert than I am of something like this.

 

1- Of course it does, but it doesn't only do that.  It further worsens tensions surrounding Islamic communities residing in western nations in which these attacks occur.

2- Not that we know of.  Yet.  If linked to a terrorist network, there is plenty of meaning.  

3- That's kind of a ghoulish thing to say, don't you think?  Plus, if this attack proves to be connected to terrorist groups, today's eight victims are the latest addition to a large and growing number.  

 

I'm more afraid of traffic accidents than mass murder of any kind, but that doesn't mean organized terror isn't a major concern for the country.  If terrorists manage to radicalize a person with greater destructive potential, and they are trying, the results could be terrible.  Not every potential killer is limited by intelligence, access, or imagination to merely renting a truck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

Fair enough.

 

To me, it is unfathomable that this could be considered terrorism as first sight but Las Vegas could not.  Un ****ing fathomable.  This was child’s play compared to Las Vegas.  This isn’t even a blip on the radar for me.

I think motive is the key here. Why are you doing what you're doing. 

 

Death toll obviously much higher in LV, but the 'why' is important. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

Fair enough.

 

To me, it is unfathomable that this could be considered terrorism as first sight but Las Vegas could not.  Un ****ing fathomable.  This was child’s play compared to Las Vegas.  This isn’t even a blip on the radar for me.

Las Vegas absolutely should be considered terrorism.  Another problem is who declares it terrorism or not?  It seems like it is used when beneficial.  That is a government issue, not a party issue.  

 

This should be a blip though.  To me, it shows that tactics being used in Europe are making their way here.  And Europe has been getting beaten up lately by some rather creative means.  

 

I told my wife years ago that it isn't planes flying into buildings we need to worry about.  It is when "they" figure out how to hit us everywhere.  By that I mean 1 guy driving a truck bomb onto a play ground.  A few coordinated people hitting a mall on Black Friday.  Movie theaters, polling stations, grocery stores, and any where else people gather.  Killing a large amount of people isn't hard if you have some creativity.  And you don't have to kill a whole bunch.  Just a couple and we get scared.  And that is the goal of terrorism.  Sadly, I have no clue how to stop it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

Fair enough.

 

To me, it is unfathomable that this could be considered terrorism as first sight but Las Vegas could not.  Un ****ing fathomable.  This was child’s play compared to Las Vegas.  This isn’t even a blip on the radar for me.

It's unfathomable to you that an attack perpetrated by a supposed Muslim at a time where we've been at war with radical Islamic terrorist groups for over 15 years might be labeled terrorism and an attack by an old white dude might not (at first glance) when we've seen lots of crazy white people just randomly shooting people for the last 10+ years?

 

Unfathomable?

 

Pretty much fits the picture for anyone paying attention.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tshile said:

It's unfathomable to you that an attack perpetrated by a supposed Muslim at a time where we've been at war with radical Islamic terrorist groups for over 15 years might be labeled terrorism and an attack by an old white dude might not (at first glance) when we've seen lots of crazy white people just randomly shooting people for the last 10+ years?

 

Unfathomable?

 

Pretty much fits the picture for anyone paying attention.

 

 

 

Yeah, I suppose you’re right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Las Vegas absolutely should be considered terrorism.  Another problem is who declares it terrorism or not?  It seems like it is used when beneficial.  That is a government issue, not a party issue.  

 

This should be a blip though.  To me, it shows that tactics being used in Europe are making their way here.  And Europe has been getting beaten up lately by some rather creative means.  

 

I told my wife years ago that it isn't planes flying into buildings we need to worry about.  It is when "they" figure out how to hit us everywhere.  By that I mean 1 guy driving a truck bomb onto a play ground.  A few coordinated people hitting a mall on Black Friday.  Movie theaters, polling stations, grocery stores, and any where else people gather.  Killing a large amount of people isn't hard if you have some creativity.  And you don't have to kill a whole bunch.  Just a couple and we get scared.  And that is the goal of terrorism.  Sadly, I have no clue how to stop it.

That's an interesting take on the matter.

I hardly call a guy driving a truck to hit people and cyclist's terrorist as well. First it's mainly because anyone can do that, easily. I'm not even sure those guys knew twoweeks before that they would do it... ISIS is now a receipt for almost everyone that wants a few minutes of "fame" while doing something crazy. Here we called "terrorism" a muslim that killed a cop and his wife before being killed. And while investigating we found out that the supposed "terrorist" had previous problems with that said cop... If he wasn't a muslim that would have never been called terrorism and just a "casual" double murder with weapon...

 

Obviously, all those acts are crazy, and dumped into the "terrorism" category by governments because that's probably easier for them to read it this way and deal with it. So you've got a witness that heard something that sound like "allahu akbar" or whatever? Bam, terrorism... If Andreas Lubitz was a Mulsim it would have labelled terrorism asap and that would have been the end of the story...

 

What we're witnessing is one guy here and there that somehow do some random killing or trying too. We've seen quite a few dumb guys trying to attack military guys in France. Just so they get killed asap...Clever. Hopefully, most of those are dumb people doing stupid things. And most of them should get rewarded with some Darwin Awards.

 

Despise the fall of ISIS in Syria and Iraki, I doubt we're seeing the end of this anytime soon. Some of them are getting creative, like the guy in Nice. Best attack system at the right place and right date. That was really scary.

 

So I see @Springfield's point. We're getting used to "small" acts like this. I say small, but that is not small in any way for all of those that lose friend, a relative or whatever in those kind of dumb****. I still think these kind of people should be overlooked by psychiatric system more than anything. While terrorists are lost for good.

 

Now, I agree on your first point, Las Vegas was terrorism in every facets. And if you don't believe it, then Anders Brevik will disagree. Being Muslim is not a must have to be a terrorist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

 

 

Now, I agree on your first point, Las Vegas was terrorism in every facets. And if you don't believe it, then Anders Brevik will disagree. Being Muslim is not a must have to be a terrorist.

 

 

whats your definition of terrorism?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

Extremly violents acts with political or ideologist motivations behind them.

 

I generally agree. What's the motivation of the LV shooter? I don't think I've heard one. Has anyone said? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, grego said:

I generally agree. What's the motivation of the LV shooter? I don't think I've heard one. Has anyone said? 

 

12 minutes ago, grego said:

Wildbunny, why isn't yesterday's incident terrorism according to the definition? 

 

Both are good questions. That's pure guts here, but I hardly think you reach the age of 60 something without being diagnosed whatever mental illness. So in this case I tend to believe that even if motivations are unheard as of today, they have to exists. And on the other hand, I have a hard time believing that people can radicalize themselves in two days.

 

But yeah, I could be wrong in both cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

 

 

Both are good questions. That's pure guts here, but I hardly think you reach the age of 60 something without being diagnosed whatever mental illness. So in this case I tend to believe that even if motivations are unheard as of today, they have to exists. And on the other hand, I have a hard time believing that people can radicalize themselves in two days.

 

But yeah, I could be wrong in both cases.

 

The LV thing is a head scratcher. I get that people snap. It happens. But this was planned so it makes it odd. Definitely could be a reason but we just don't know it yet. Could be that he developed some kind of chemical imbalance that contributed. I don't know. Usually the motive is known fairly quickly because they want you to know. 

 

What do you mean by the radicalized in two days thing? I haven't read anything about NY this morning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, grego said:

What do you mean by the radicalized in two days thing? I haven't read anything about NY this morning. 

 

That's the kind of stuff I used to hear regurlaly here in France with those stupid attacks here and there. Guys that wake up a morning take a knife or two and decide to try to kill people here and there... Somehow, that attack in NY seems to fit that kind of theory, which I hardly believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing I want to know, which I don't think we can ever know, is when was he radicalized. Was his plan to commit a terror act in the US while he was in Ubekestan? Was it shortly after reaching the US? Was it due to the rise in hate crimes and hate language we've seen over the last twelve months? What drove him over the edge and why now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand this bizarre argument over what to label terrorism.  If it was politically motivated it's terrorism, if not it's mass murder.  The number of people killed or injured doesn't factor in.  

 

A person can be a terrorist without having killed anyone.  Terrorist organizations like ISIS are comprised of much more than just mass murderers.  The people handling the money, recruiting, and even managing their online presence are all terrorists.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I apologize.  I attempted to spell it fonetically.    :kiss-smileys:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I know it is actually "phonetically"

 

10 hours ago, visionary said:

Thanks, I didn't think I was spelling it right.  

its cool, I actually misspelled "Akbar" in my post by mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Destino said:

I don't understand this bizarre argument over what to label terrorism.  If it was politically motivated it's terrorism, if not it's mass murder.  The number of people killed or injured doesn't factor in.  

 

A person can be a terrorist without having killed anyone.  Terrorist organizations like ISIS are comprised of much more than just mass murderers.  The people handling the money, recruiting, and even managing their online presence are all terrorists.  

 

I officially nominate Destino for head of Homeland Security.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

 

its cool, I actually misspelled "Akbar" in my post by mistake.

I actually see that spelling online. I'm not sure akbar is wrong per se. Kind of like Quran and Koran, Mohammed/Muhammed. Different alphabet, so the translation will be imperfect. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Destino said:

I don't understand this bizarre argument over what to label terrorism.  If it was politically motivated it's terrorism, if not it's mass murder.  The number of people killed or injured doesn't factor in.  

 

A person can be a terrorist without having killed anyone.  Terrorist organizations like ISIS are comprised of much more than just mass murderers.  The people handling the money, recruiting, and even managing their online presence are all terrorists.  

I think this is close, but a little narrow. It can be politically motivated and/or religiously motivated. As I hit send, I think that may be narrow too. I suspect the key is hate. Is the act of "terror" one aimed to harm or intimidate any group. 

 

I can see acts of terrorism against the US, but also against Jews, Muslims, Christians, Gays, etc. I think the key is the hate and the reaction the instigator wants to get from a group or against a group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...