Europe is safer so why are we more frightened?

NATO is not safety. NATO is threat.
Out with NATO, out with threat.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree with you 100 percent.

 

The same is true with "studies" they keep flashing on the TV. The American study at Hijibeejee from the university of Muleshoe has found that the vast majority of divorce stems from economic factors. Well, that might apply in the US or in Muleshoe but has no bearing on Sweden. So why do we show it on our news media???????

 

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha......that's the funnest comment on the whole thread - well done sunshine!

 

as someone about to hit the half century, i'd like to thank you for the kid comment - That'll keep me going for ages.

Have you always been easy to frighten then?
Did you grow up in a predominantly white area?

Funny isn't it - For my parents it was the germans who were the bad guys, when i was a kid it was the IRA and now we have the "global terror network" that the muslims have created and we seem more frightened now than ever.

What an easily frightened country we've become - Its really quite sad when you think about it.

 

Stopped? according to America, global terrorism was first detected around 2001 - This was news to many of us but it must've been true becuase there was even a war named after it.

In the past 16 years, this "global terror network" hasn't killed anywhere near as many of us as a bunch of angry people from ireland did...and you are saying they will dwarf all other terrorism?

When? How much longer do i have to wait for this to happen? 10 years? 50 years?.....when?

Considering muslims are 1 in 5 of the human population of earth, don't you think they'd have "taken over europe" by now?
If 1 in 5 of all humans wanted to "take over the world", i would imagine the'd do it in their lunch hour.

You must've been to europe recently to have such a considered opinion - Where did you go?

 

Complete nonsense!

The UK leaving the EU has accelerated various european defence initiatives, like the norwegian-german submarine deal, a german-french airlift command, the dutch-german army coopperation and so on. The EU, without UK, has a military budget over 200 billion Euros and over 1 million soldiers, including french nukes. At the moment the defence structure in the EU is grossly inefficient but without UK preventing useful adaption it will change.

 

I think the number was about 2,000 starting from the beginnings of the troubles right up until the peace process - This was a mixture of civilians & soldiers.

 

You claimed there was no censorship and I showed that there is.

 

Who needs soldiers when they've got nukes? Serious question!

 

This is my point - I keep being told "terrorists!!!!!", "riots!!!!!!"......"danger!!!!!!"

I've seen worse violence at a football game.

If burning a few cars, committing a few terrorist acts and a few crimes is all it take these days to make people this frightened then i think i have my answer.

We are weaker dumber & easier to frighten that our parents and grand parents were and i think that's sad.

 

Do you have some evidence for this claim?

Really? What was that and who was involved?

Another fact free sentence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

Depends where you live. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ-VVa2x_w4

And how would they do that? Theirs is a slow war, as Qaddafi explains, and is moving along very well.

 

Great link that highlights something i've thought for ages.

When i was younger, we at least had the intelligence to abuse people based upon their nationality - The work Pakki for example.

Now, since 9/11 we use the M word which completely negates the individual culture and religion of each country.

The area of Bristol i grew up in was mainly sikh and muslim and we understood the differences between the 2.

Now, since the war on terror, we're using the M word for anyone with dark skin - We're becoming a country of dumb c##ts

 

Serious question? Really? A little bit trolling?

US nukes didn't help to accomplish the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's about nuclear deterrence.

 

Then you know how this 'war' is being fought.

Others have also noticed this steady decline, for over a generation at least, and it's a damned shame. It used to be quite a pleasant place, filled with civil people..

- - - Updated - - -

Nukes are useless in this war. France is under siege and their nukes won't make any difference at all.

 

No - but before 9/11 i don't remember any "global war on Terror" - By the way, I've still never worked out how you have a war on an emotion.

mate - I'm talking the UK - now, i'm sure you have a link somewhere that will prove me wrong but, muslims haven't killed as many people in the UK since 9/11 than the IRA managed in a shorter time scale.

The video was ace! Shall we try and find one of fat american policeman shooting unarmed black children?

You are really easy to frighten aren't you! When were you last in europe then and did you feel less safe in europe than you do in the US?

 

The US 'missions' in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't been accomplished yet - the military is still there? Your 'nuclear deterrence' doesn't seem to deter the Iraqi jihadists nor the Taliban?

 

Most of us understood what Blucher was saying, nukes are there as a deterrent against other nuclear attack, they are of no use for small conflicts like Iraq or Afghanistan. For that you need people who are not cowards to actually do some fighting. Even Thatcher would not of used nukes when she sent our boys to the Falklands to die for her re-election.

 

Most wars are fought on emotions.

Apologies. I understood we were talking global.

Yes, it explained things well.

Does the thought of that excite you?

I feel safe everywhere.

 

France has a severe social problem in their banlieus, a problem described in my french school book over thirty years ago and it seems that not much happend to solve it.

 

Why are you quoting me when you know you're on my ignore list, therefore I won't even read your post never mind reply to it?

 

Everywhere. even in the bad bits of Chicago, the bits described as worse that a middle east hellhole?

 

Since you can't nuke every lunatic in the world you need soldiers, your question is answered by yourself. Mission accomplished was meant ironic, i had G. W. Bush in my mind. As a non native english speaker i should probably try to avoid it or make it rather clear.

 

Because I do not care about your ignore list, and I am pointing out the parts of your posts I disagree with. Tough.

And others can read where your posts are wrong, all your ignore list does is limit your chance of making a response.You curtail yourself not me!

 

No problem. I didn't know that English is not your first language, and apologise if I came across as a bid rude.