Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

I advocate the use of nuclear weapons and would turn the entire region into glass.

I'd also ban Islam mind.

Probably save a few quid :)
 
We certainly need to work together with other countries and have a coherent strategy to defeat ISIS and ultimately bring about peace in the Middle East, something which appears to be desperately lacking at the moment. I'm don't think this will be achieved through bombs though and yet another military intervention. Surely past conflicts in Afghanistan, libya and Iraq show that us getting involved only makes things worse and destabilises the countries even further and makes them more insecure? It coud be argued that our interventions have actually helped fan the flames for terrorism and for barbaric groups such as ISIS to occupy, not to mention contribute towards the displacement of millions of refugees across Europe. Whatever we may think of dictators such as Hussein and Gadaffi, at least they were relatively stable before we got involved, not the terror-ridden, state of anarchy they are in today. Simply dropping bombs won't stop these people in my mind. Having enough police on our streets would be a start (which is hard due to Tory cuts), as well as tightening our own security (giving the security services the resources they need) and dealing with the root causes of radicalisation in our communities and prisons. We also need to be working with our neighbours across the world to try and find a diplomatic and peaceful solution to this.
 
With your emphasis on domestic security and nostalgia for the deposed strongmen of the region you are really spoiling us. Luckily you don't get to decide whether the Tunisian vegetable seller died in vain.
 
How many police on the streets would be enough? I don't see how that makes a blind bit of difference. More police, more surveillance? Better, more thorough, more extensive, more authoritarian work by the authorities.

It depresses me a bit when people are prepared to accept, and even demand, increasingly authoritarian measures following any attack.
 
Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should be giving the security services unlimited power without proper safeguards in place to protect civil liberties and checks in place to make sure surveillance methods are working/effective. As for police cuts, I do believe that the huge Tory cuts to police on our streets at a time when we do face the threat of a potential Paris style attack in this country, is putting public safety at risk.
 
As for police cuts, I do believe that the huge Tory cuts to police on our streets at a time when we do face the threat of a potential Paris style attack in this country, is putting public safety at risk.
How?

Genuine question. I don't see how. France has armed coppers, and a semi-military branch of the police that we don't have. Looking it up, they have manpower of 250,000. That's a lot more than the UK. And yet... Paris.
 
How?

Genuine question. I don't see how. France has armed coppers, and a semi-military branch of the police that we don't have. Looking it up, they have manpower of 250,000. That's a lot more than the UK. And yet... Paris.
Sadly, nothing we can do is ever going to totally protect us from a potential terrorist attack. But cutting the number of police on our streets is clearly not going to help. What is your view on the police cuts/cuts in general?
 
Sadly, nothing we can do is ever going to totally protect us from a potential terrorist attack. But cutting the number of police on our streets is clearly not going to help. What is your view on the police cuts/cuts in general?
I probably differ quite a bit from you in my attitude towards the police. Seeing coppers on the street doesn't make me feel safer. Quite the opposite. But generally, the idea that 'bobbies on the beat' protect you is merely giving an illusion of safety. Cutting the number of coppers on the street - if that is what is happening - won't make a blind bit of difference to terrorism.

This has nothing whatever to do with my attitude towards cuts in general.
 
I probably differ quite a bit from you in my attitude towards the police. Seeing coppers on the street doesn't make me feel safer. Quite the opposite. But generally, the idea that 'bobbies on the beat' protect you is merely giving an illusion of safety. Cutting the number of coppers on the street - if that is what is happening - won't make a blind bit of difference to terrorism.

This has nothing whatever to do with my attitude towards cuts in general.
That's fair enough. We all have different opinions. My view on the cuts in general is most of them are totally unnecessary and ideological in their nature.
 
That's fair enough. We all have different opinions. My view on the cuts in general is most of them are totally unnecessary and ideological in their nature.
Of course. This isn't the thread for that, though.

But I would say that you should at least have some idea how more coppers would protect us from terrorism, if that's something you're proposing.
 
I never said more coppers. I said don't cut the ones we already have.

Amounts to the same thing - presented with two numbers, you want the higher one, and why? Because terrorism.

Setting aside the general point about opposing cuts, you still need to make a case for exactly how reducing the number of coppers would increase vulnerability to terrorist attacks.

You seem to think this is self-evidently true, but it isn't to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom