Some Action Must Be Taken

[sp1814]

After a terrorist attack, some people say that 'action must be taken', and that 'the West must wake up'.

These are abstracts - can anyone explain in (without the use of abstractions) what specifically they mean by 'action'.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

What action should be taken?

Well it has been reported that this one slipped through the net.

May I suggest a 'closer knit net'?

[-Talbot-]

That was a terrorist attack.

[Samjenko]

grrrr

[emmie]

Allen
so far we have seen endless Islamic Muslim attacks, this one included, they are indiscriminate and deadly, stop apologising for them. This is no knee jerk reaction, but as someone who was in the vicinity of the 7/7 i can safely say that i would arm all police, give our security services every power to root out these criminals.

[-Talbot-]

Do you have anger management issues, allen?

[jno]

this wasn't really much of an attack, though people died. In days gone by an MP was blown up while leaving the Parliament car park. Today, all "terrorists" can do is drive a car into people on Westminster Bridge, which unfortunately anyone can do (and drunks occasionally do the same thing). What would be the next thing to do? Close all bridges? Close all roads? Ban all cars?

[Peter Pedant]

the action would be more lock down in Westminster

and further isolation of the Great and Good who rule us
from those they are ruling

[Peter Pedant]

// Remember the mad Norwegian who killed so many young people on their island holiday a few years back? White, Christian, barmy, right-wing, loner. //

yeah I agree banning made norwegian white christian barmy loners is obviously gonna work ....

they're all faired haired right - so we can round up a few of them and deport them back to Norwegia or wherever it is they come from

[mushroom25]

oooh, what's been removed?

[mikey4444]

Emmie...we have not seen "endless" terrorists attack Europe is a huge geographical area, with many millions of people or residents.

The attack yesterday was the first such attack in Britain, for some while. We were told this morning, that the security forces have foiled over 20 similar attacks in Britain.

[Kromovaracun]

At risk of sounding all "elitist"....

The elephant in the room here is that very, very few of us are really qualified to make a judgement about effective security policies. It could be that "banning muslims" (to take a common example) or forcibly closing mosques would reduce our risk of terror attacks to 0. It's equally plausible that it wouldn't, because people could just pretend not to be Muslims and then undertake an armed struggle against a government that persecutes them. Either one is complete speculation by people who are frightened and bereaved. Understandable - satisfying, even, because it lets us pretend we know how to make ourselves safe. But if we're being really honest with ourselves, we know it's not really actionable.

Obviously, though, it would also be pretty unreasonable to expect everyone to just keep quiet after an event like yesterday. So if we stick to what we know, and try to avoid speculating on what we don't know, what are we left with?

Unless you're willing to personally join the security services who actually combat and try to pre-empt these people - and who know more than any of us do at any given time - then, unfortunately, all we can really do is accept that the world is a slightly more dangerous place than it used to be, and try to factor that in when we make daily decisions about our safety. All of us know that every time we walk outside we run the small risk of being caught up in an atrocity. (You agree with this even if you think you don't - if you believed that the likelihood of this was more than slim, you would never under any circumstances leave your house). The only "action" any of us can seriously take is to factor this small risk in to how we go about our lives and try to be as cautious as is reasonable.

I know that isn't exciting or satisfying, but I think that's about all we've got.

[mikey4444]

Kromo....Banning and persecuting religions has been tried before, with lamentable results, so I can't see that it would be effective nowadays, even if it was actually possible to do it.

[jno]

agree with Kromovaracun. I'm no more scared of terrorists than I am of being killed in a car accident; both are statistically very unlikely, and the thought has never stopped me getting in a car or walking on Westminster Bridge. I even climb ladders, though something like 50 people a year die falling off one.

[-Talbot-]

Judging by the best answer ... the answer is do nothing.

[andy-hughes]

Kromo - as so often, your point is succinct and well argued.

Persecuting Islamists simply underlines their perception that they are persecuted already, by the infidel West - it would simply make them more determined to kill as many of us as possible, hardly the result we are supposed to be looking for.

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - //Judging by the best answer ... the answer is do nothing. //

If that is your interpretation, I suggest that you have not understood the point that the post makes.

Doing things which are either ineffective, or make things worse is not the same as doing nothing.

[-Talbot-]

then, unfortunately, all we can really do is accept that the world is a slightly more dangerous place than it used to be, and try to factor that in when we make daily decisions about our safety.