New bombs planted on Spanish Train lines.

[epicstruggle]

What? Feeling less safe because you're not coming over?

Yes, if epicstruggle came over he would be our human shield.

Im not big enough to stop much.

Recall that earthquake in Iran in december? 30,000 dead. That's probably more than all people that have died because of terrorism through the last 100 years.

Ive found abou 20k deaths by terrorist between 1993-1998. I think the rest of the 30k can be found from 98 to today.

later,
epic

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Where did you pull those statistics from now?
The usual place? Your buttox.

 

[epicstruggle]

Where did you pull those statistics from now?
The usual place? Your buttox.

actually google is your friend. search for "terrorist acts total casualties"

later,
epic

 

[Nappe1]

epicstruggle: that's the stats for the whole world. in case using it as comparison, should be noted that there has been several huge earthquakes during last 10 years, killing a lot more than 30,000 ppl.

I'd guestimate that we are talking about over 150,000 ppl dying in earthquakes since 1993.

EDIT: if we take 100 years scale, the value gets high as over a 1,000,000 ppl.

 

[epicstruggle]

epicstruggle: that's the stats for the whole world. in case using it as comparison, should be noted that there has been several huge earthquakes during last 10 years, killing a lot more than 30,000 ppl.

I'd guestimate that we are talking about over 150,000 ppl dying in earthquakes since 1993.

EDIT: if we take 100 years scale, the value gets high as over a 1,000,000 ppl.

I was just responding to humus's post that there hasnt been more than 30,000 deaths due to terrorism in the last 100 years. That was all I was trying to debunk. Nothing else. Im sure lots of things have killed more people. Hell smoking kills an unbelievable number and it would be such an easy thing to just ban smoking to save those lives.

later,
epic

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Epic, aren't you more afraid of some gang member or KKK nazi killing you for some cash or because you aren't pale enough for them than a terrorist attack?

 

[epicstruggle]

Epic, aren't you more afraid of some gang member or KKK nazi killing you for some cash or because you aren't pale enough for them than a terrorist attack?

I work in detroit, so what im more afraid of is being killed for not being dark enough. Anyways these are things i can deal with. But when i go on vacation i dont want to have to worry about being in a train and looking for unattended packages. But maybe i should start doing that around here too.

I guess its because im going with my wife, and am more apprehansive of these things.

later,
epic

 

[Clashman]

That really doesn't make a whole lotta sense. There were 1,006 people killed by terrorism in N. America in 1993? Yet the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing isn't even mentioned on there? Strange...

Actually, looking at the page you got that from, they are counting injured as casualties, citing 6 killed and "over 1,000" injured, to come up with 1,006 casualties in N. America for 1993. And the OC bombing is still absent. In other words, I'd be careful quoting those numbers.

 

[Heathen]

Those of you in Europe, are you feeling less safe? Any change in attitudes? Any backlash against the muslim comunity?

No, No and No

You change anything you do due to terrorism you let them win.

 

[epicstruggle]

That really doesn't make a whole lotta sense. There were 1,006 people killed by terrorism in N. America in 1993? Yet the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing isn't even mentioned on there? Strange...

Actually, looking at the page you got that from, they are counting injured as casualties, citing 6 killed and "over 1,000" injured, to come up with 1,006 casualties in N. America for 1993. And the OC bombing is still absent. In other words, I'd be careful quoting those numbers.

The link to the image was something like "people killed by terrorism between 93-98". Also remember that they could be counting many deaths in mexico. Yeah that graph did seem odd, but its in keeping with the source state.gov.

did a bit of checking at state.gov here is the image:

It looks like they dont consider oklahoma, because it wasnt an international terrorist group.
original state.gov image:

later,
epic

 

[Clashman]

But look where they break down total attacks by year:

There's only 1 for all of 1993 in N. America. They are clearly referring to the WTC attack. These figures are only for wounded, not killed. The website you originally got this from I believe was mistaken.

Here's the whole report from '98:
http://fas.org/irp/threat/terror_98/

 

[Humus]

Ok, so maybe we can get over 30,000, maybe we can't. In any case though, the point is still the same. The threat from terrorism is still small compared to the threats from car accident, robberies, illness, earthquakes etc. The worst thing we can do is to begin changing things because of terrorism. Not just because the actual threat in itself is so small and we should be worrying about other things instead, but also because if we do, terrorism becomes a tool that can actually make a difference. If we start limiting our own freedoms, cancel flights etc. out of fear, then that's a victory for the terrorists. Instead we should just go on with our lives and promote freedom in places where terrorist groups flourish.

 

[Sabastian]

Something I found surprising is that even though Spains new government announced that it was pulling out of Iraq and denounced the operation in its entirety they are suffering attacks yet from terrorist. WTF is up with that anyhow Spaniards not moving out of Iraq quick enough for the terrorists or what? I think that it is possible that the terrorist are seeing this new governments weak hand as something that they can take advantage of possibly. Anyhow I was surprised to read these articles yesterday and today.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/04/03/spain.bombings/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/04/iraq.main/index.html

 

[Clashman]

Did you even read the damned article, Sabastian? The bomb went off when they were trying to apprehend suspects of the earlier train bombing. The people who blew themselves up did so to avoid arrest. This has absolutely nothing to do with Spain "pulling out of Iraq soon enough", and everything to do with the perils you risk when confronting terrorists using police work, (as opposed to simply bombing the shit out of 3rd world countries).

As for the second article, that too was not related directly to Spain's pulling out, but rather to clashes that broke out after allegations that Spanish troops had detained an aide to al Sadr, and because the CPA had shut down their newspaper the previous week. There is also at least one report that indicates that the Spanish and Salvadoran troops were the first to open fire, and not al Sadr's militia:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...40404/ts_nm/iraq_dc&cid=564&ncid=1478

 

[Sabastian]

Clashman, I said it might be a possibility. If Spain continues to be attacked by terrorist in one way or another then we might be able to imply that terrorist organizations see the new Spanish authority as something they can manipulate. (or that at least they think they can.)

BTW I did read the articles. The Spanish are not solely responsible for ether the closer of the newspaper or the accused detention of the cleric in question.(Something the coalition denies BTW.) There is footage that shows the protestors were the aggressors in the matter and had already opened fire on the Spanish detachment there I saw it on CNN. Further Spanish police in Spain have recently found a bomb still on the train tracks and an unexploded car bomb.

At any rate the whole idea is that it was a possibility that the terrorist are targeting the new Spanish authority but you deny that possibility in its entirety. I would say that more terrorist attacks might bolster that hypothesis further.

 

[Clashman]

BTW I did read the articles. The Spanish are not solely responsible for ether the closer of the newspaper or the accused detention of the cleric in question.(Something the coalition denies BTW.)

That doesn't change the fact that this was entirely unrelated to the Madrid bombings. They marched on the Spanish HQ because they were the ones in Najaf, just like they tried to march on Coalition HQ in Baghdad. It's not related, get over it.

There is footage that shows the protestors were the aggressors in the matter and had already opened fire on the Spanish detachment there I saw it on CNN.

If you have a link to the video, I'd be interested in seeing it. I highly doubt they have footage of the start of the violence, as I'm pretty sure that would be on some of the news sites by now. It has been indicated that the battle was going on for a good 3 hours after the start. I don't think we'll ever know who "started it".

Edit: The BBC indicated that it was impossible to tell who fired the first shots.

Further Spanish police in Spain have recently found a bomb still on the train tracks and an unexploded car bomb.

And maybe if you had originally based your argument on that rather than completely unrelated events your thesis would have had some credibility.

At any rate the whole idea is that it was a possibility that the terrorist are targeting the new Spanish authority but you deny that possibility in its entirety. I would say that more terrorist attacks might bolster that hypothesis further.

No, I don't deny that possiblity. However, the logic you used to come to that conclusion is flawed, as the events previously described were entirely unrelated to one another, and in fact didn't have anything to do with terrorists attacking the new Spanish government because it's "weak on terror". The only thing they had in common was that their perpetrators were Muslim, which frankly isn't a compelling enough argument that the events were linked in any way.

 

[Sabastian]

At any rate the whole idea is that it was a possibility that the terrorist are targeting the new Spanish authority but you deny that possibility in its entirety. I would say that more terrorist attacks might bolster that hypothesis further.

No, I don't deny that possiblity.

Good then. I am not up for a big debate on the matter anyhow. It was simply a suggestion well within the realm of possibility.

 

[pcchen]

An asteroid may will leave nothing behind. Maybe Earth will be a bunch of floating debris?
If the Earth isn't destoryed then any survivors are going to go through craploads more hell than 100,000,000,000 9/11s.

Ugh, no. The earth has survived several big asteroid hit and it's still intact. Of course, a big asteroid hit may destroy most large animals (including homo sapiens), but it is extremely rare (perhaps once in 100 million years average).

 

[Sabastian]

heh....

MADRID, Spain - An Islamic group that claims responsibility for the Madrid bombings says it will turn Spain “into an infernoâ€￾ unless the country halts its support for the United States and withdraws its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4651993/

EDIT:[action]Rubs Clashmans nose in it..[/action] Meh, couldn't resist.

 

[Druga Runda]

No way it could be 30000... I can bet thar including 9-11 all time death toll from the terrorists is less than 10000 - that is bombers and similar to be precise. If you could include "state" terrorism dependable on definition the figure would go to millions... but just individual organizations like IRA, ETA, Hamas, AlQ and similar.... I doubt it exceedes 10000 to date...