Article

2004-04-03 Britain

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-04-03 3:15:57 PM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Wait till we have our first bombing attrocity in the UK - it *will* happen.

Expect to see that 73% increase - and if you discount the Musllum population, I would expect that number to be high 90's.

Posted by Tony (UK) 2004-04-03 3:34:58 PM|| 2004-04-03 3:34:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Two-thirds (66 per cent) support the governmentâs policy to take an active part in the war against al-Qaeda. Just a quarter are against the fight. And an overwhelming 73 per cent want to see a shoot-to-kill policy against suicide bombers.

Interesting result. And if you discount the MPopulation.... then.... hmmmm. I assume (and have no clue) but this means that 7 percent are against the war on terror but a for a shoot to kill policy.... Geeez. Actually I figure it means 7 percent of the population wants to escalate the WOT.

Posted by Shipman 2004-04-03 4:06:31 PM|| 2004-04-03 4:06:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Of course you have to strike a line between resolution and defiance, and this kind of shit.

Posted by Leftwat 2004-04-03 4:26:32 PM|| 2004-04-03 4:26:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 DAMMIT! That was me.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-04-03 4:27:17 PM|| 2004-04-03 4:27:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 I neeed to stop experimenting with pseudonymous posting...

Posted by Bulldog 2004-04-03 4:30:29 PM|| 2004-04-03 4:30:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Heh. And here was I thinking wishy-washy liberal edumakashun was ruining our youngâuns.

Who are you calling a young'un, Gramps?

Posted by Charles 2004-04-03 5:03:22 PM|| 2004-04-03 5:03:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 This is a breath of fresh air. I long have known the Brits wouldn't take an attack stiing down. My concerns were based on the large anti-war marches. Obviously most Britons don't agree with the liberal left loonies.

Posted by Bill Nelson 2004-04-03 5:32:41 PM|| 2004-04-03 5:32:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Bulldog and/or Tony, about which entity that the British public prefers be the vehicle for the offensive portion of the WOT? Out of the choices of the UK alone, the UN, the EU, NATO or the Coalition of the Willing, my guess would be that you would prefer that the focus be through NATO. The Iraq War seems to be crumbling NATO. Do the British still put a lot of stock in NATO when the group seems to have devolved into two heavy lifters and several other special-teamers?

Posted by Super Hose 2004-04-03 5:37:22 PM|| 2004-04-03 5:37:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Two statistics from the source site are pretty mystifying.

-------------------------

"A narrow majority, 51 per cent, are more concerned for their safety after the 9/11 and Madrid attacks.

... Britons are also defiant in the face of warnings that a major terrorist attack here is now inevitable."

-------------------------

Those are alarming manifestations of outright deluded thinking.

Posted by Zenster 2004-04-03 6:17:19 PM|| 2004-04-03 6:17:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Zaen - why? Individuals may feel that an attack is ineveitable (forever is a long time to be vigilant), but that they don't want to give in to their fears (the best attitude)and that the chance of personally being injured is small (likely)

Posted by Frank G 2004-04-03 6:24:37 PM|| 2004-04-03 6:24:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Good post, Bulldog.
When the British public support a "shoot to kill" policy (That's called "suicide by cop" here in America) for terrorists, I suppose it's a way to go around the fact that their criminal justice system did away with the death penalty.

Posted by Jen 2004-04-03 6:37:30 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-04-03 6:37:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Zaen - why? Individuals may feel that an attack is ineveitable (forever is a long time to be vigilant), but that they don't want to give in to their fears (the best attitude)and that the chance of personally being injured is small (likely)

It is delusional that nearly half of Britain's people do not recognize terrorism's imminent threat while remaining defiant about being attacked. However small the chance of individual injury might be, an attack on one is an attack on all. It is freedom that is being assaulted, not just a person's corporeal body.

Being concerned solely for one's own personal safety is the terrorists' precise aim. It permits the victims to justify acceptance of their demands. Simple defiance is wholly insufficient to defeat terrorism. It is mandatory to have an intransigent and lethal response to all who assail individual liberty so monstrously. Anything less is suicidal surrender to a remorseless killer.

Terrorists are not trying to kill just a people, race, culture or competing religion. They seek no less than to extinguish the memes of freedom and equality. We are witnessing a naked attempt to kill off the principal of self determination and even that of liberty itself. Which portion of these inalienable human rights do you propose to let them extort from us?

Posted by Zenster 2004-04-03 8:36:30 PM|| 2004-04-03 8:36:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Way to go Britain !

Kill the terrorists on the "battlefield" is the cleanest solution, and it looks like a significant number of people do not have their head up their behind and realize that.

Posted by Carl in NH 2004-04-03 8:36:45 PM|| 2004-04-03 8:36:45 PM|| Front Page Top

09:48 Anonymous4019
00:00 CrazyFool
23:54 .com
23:39 Jen
23:34 .com
23:29 phil_b
23:27 Jen
23:11 .com
23:09 Zenster
23:06 Jen
23:03 Zenster
23:01 Jen
22:50 Zenster
22:44 .com
22:37 phil_b
22:27 .com
22:13 Zenster
22:08 Zenster
18:01 Frank G
17:43 Zenster
00:11 Atomic Conspiracy
23:54 Blue Eyed Devil
23:53 Steve White
23:42 Phil Fraering