Personal freedom is a big thing in a democracy/republican in this day an age, especially ones founded on classical liberal principles. Where were the republicans on civil rights when Bush signed the patriot act, where was Obama he went against his promise to abolish it?
Look at the UK, they have cameras all over the place, some of them can talk too
. How is that freedom? Look all the laws in the UK that are meant to curb crime, yet you still hear about stabbings and assaults with knives. All these laws are just play off fear mongering so they have a reason to exist and their only intent is make the state stronger.
I might not be old, but I was 8 when 9/11 happened. No one talked about terrorism back then prior to that date except for maybe the occasional attack like on the USS Cole. Obviously wasn't best of times, but it was probably better than what we had now state of affairs wise. You were probably more likely hear something about terrorism on a rerun of True Lies than on TV. Ever since 9/11 the media has always been talking about the constant threat of terrorism, terrorist attacks. It's reported so much I lost talk of all the attacks that happen. Today there might be a attack on London, tomorrow a hand grenade attack in Stockholm, followed by nothing, and then two attacks in Paris the day after.
In addition to all the reports of terrorism attacks we've seen more increase on security. In Europe we are seeing more military patrols, and tighter security being placed on the border, especially in the Balkans. While the state should provide for the safety and welfare of its citizens, there have been increase in counter terrorism grants. New riot gear, new body armor, new mine resistant vehicles for police and military police(gendarmes). Better quality surveillance systems with improved audio recording. So basically people have a reason to make money off this and have the means to keep it going.
Besides profiteering off fear mongering in the US and EU, no one really seems to have a plan for handling terrorism outside of their countries. Basically its just sit and do nothing until another attack happens, have a candle light vigil, then flash some lights onto a national monument. Usually most terrorists have a political goal in mind when committing their act of violence. Basically commit acts of violence and until the thing you want politically is finally achieved. Take ALF for example who wants an end to animal testing, and to oppose it they usually burn down labs conducting animal testing. Arsons will continue until you give into their demands. Groups like ISIS only seek to take as much land as possible and spread their version of Islam. Outside of that, the only solution to terrorism is go drop bombs in the desert for every attack. Perhaps nation building maybe?
Don't go in and wreck a country in some war, install a corrupt inefficient government and leave? I remember this documentary on National Geographic/Nat-Geo where the marines and Canadian forces assault a major Taliban village. Then they built a park by basically building a few metal benches around a tree, gave suit cases of money to the families civilians that died, and left. We need to take a page out of the marshall plan and give these countries a means of rebuilding their cities and restoring/building up their economies. The average militant is your average peasant who is only fighting because the extremists said they'd provide food/money/land/shelter. The more stable your government, and the more economic opportunities you have, the reason groups like isis have to exist. Yet no one wants to do that because its seen as a waste of time, money, and is also seen as modern imperialism.
Yet hear we are, still creating new and more fresh a authoritarian ideas and dropping more bombs, so that modern terrorist groups can rise up so that we can pass more authoritarian measures so that we can bomb them again so that more groups can rise up so that we can bomb them again so that some company who makes weapons makes money and so guy who supports them gets to have more power to make more money in office himself/herself. Meanwhile more knife control, now we are seeing "internet licenses", more gun control measures, and even proposals to put restrictions on black powder muzzling loading firearms.
Frencho wrote:U.K is handling this better than France, Belgium and Germany TBH, partly because terrorist douchebags can't get their hands on firearms and have to use ramming cars and kitchen hardware.
The Manchester artificer was more proficient than Belgium or Paris one, cuz go figure, there are more readily available home-made bomb making manuals/internet guides in the English language...
I disagree about the weapons and explosives part. During the cold war, the red brigades in Italy would get their weapons from their neighbor in Yugoslavia. Just take a boat over to Yugoslavia and come back to Italy with a crate of weapons. Imagine the same holds true today. Go to Bulgaria and pay a visit to some mobster or corrupt army officer and acquire a crate of weapons and arms which were written off as a lost logistics or something.
Why bother going to your average store to buy something like a muzzle loader/hunting rifle when there are already better things that can be smuggled out of a neighboring country. As for bombs, you can pretty much build one out of anything. If you really lacked materials, you could just pour massive puddle of bleach and chlorine. Plus not every lonewolf or terrorist is an expert one making bombs, groups like the Weather Underground were novices at best. To give you idea of how bad at making bombs they were, their bombs killed their members more than their intended targets.