There are far more deaths caused in in UK and USA by gangs, thugs, criminal, yobs etc than by terrorists. Yet the government goes invading countries to tackle "terrorism" without much explanation to us and despite our protests, using OUR tax money when it could be handling the problem at home and making it better. I think i have more chance of getting stabbed and killed by a yob trying to steal my mobile than a terroist bombing me. Is the government dumb, blind or just careless?
2006-10-05 02:36:11 · 16 answers · asked by Zed 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If there was a terrorist attack which killed hundreds you would probably be asking why does the Govt. not spend more money on security to protect us from these MASS MURDERERS to give them their proper name. There is no virgins waiting in heaven for those that commit atrocities..
2006-10-05 03:54:19 · answer #1 · answered by Tws 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Governments/Elite families need to always have a Bogey man lurking in the shadows to keep you scared, this makes you easier to manipulate. The so called cold-war was a shame just like the whole terrorist threat is today. This is wide scale False-Flag operations in which Mercenaries are used to cause havoc around the world whilst blaming groups some of which don't even exist at all, and some countries make up attacks to obtain more funding to fight terrorist or stage a bloodless coup.
2006-10-05 10:57:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, they are not dumb, blind or careless. the reason there are not more deaths because they look after even you. Terrorists can, and do kill hundreds at a time. Ask the family's of those killed in London if the terrorists should aloud to do as they wish. Ask the 4000 killed and injured in New York if our Governments should try and stop them. The terrorists want one thing, to impose their will on you. God help you if they do
2006-10-05 10:06:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's the only reason they have left to start wars these days... just call a country a "terrorist haven" or a country that "harbors terrorists" and invade them for oil. Remember though, I voted for Gore and Kerry so don't blame me for that moron of a president we have in the US. I can see Blair's reasoning though... he didn't want to get invaded so he went along with Bush.
2006-10-05 11:12:18 · answer #4 · answered by rjakjr 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1. Tony Blair is obsessed with terrorists...he wants to be remembered for something...he won't be remembered for much more than the Iraq war
2. Saddam Husayn rebuilt Ur, carving his name on the bricks and there is a plaque on a hospital in Baghdad saying built in the ERA of Saddam Husayn
2006-10-05 18:53:35 · answer #5 · answered by Conservative 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because terrorists want to take out as many people as possible with an act. For example, strapping bombs on and running into a crowd. Gangs and criminals tend to single out individuals.
2006-10-05 10:00:55 · answer #6 · answered by nite_raideress 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We were lucky the terrorists didn't bring this country to it's knees on 9/11. Can you imagine what it would be like if each of those planes hit it's target? Our financial center, military center, and our national leaders would have been destroyed.
2006-10-05 09:53:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe you should have been around the World Trade Center 9/11.
2006-10-05 09:43:34 · answer #8 · answered by 3810trebor@sbcglobal.net 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
A terrorist attack would kill a lot more people in one hit than a single 'yob'.
2006-10-05 09:37:51 · answer #9 · answered by claire 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Did you forget September 11 ?
2006-10-05 09:40:30 · answer #10 · answered by "I Want to Know Your Answer 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋