Trump Thread

[Montmorency]

Statistics would presumably show that the number of people killed by Islamists or Islamists-inspired attackers in Europe is currently at or near an all-time high.

Higher than in the past - and? Should it be a source of urgent alarm in daily activities?

[Viking]

Higher than in the past - and?

Can we predict where the ceiling will be? A trend upwards isn't particularly promising, particularly when the trends for most (?) other forms of antisocial activity seem to go the other way.

Should it be a source of urgent alarm in daily activities?

Is it, though?

[Montmorency]

Can we predict where the ceiling will be? A trend upwards isn't particularly promising, particularly when the trends for most (?) other forms of antisocial activity seem to go the other way.

We're at a ceiling for the time being, unless or until a much more powerful internationalist organization arises with ideology calling for a focus on the West (Al Qaeda's long-war focus on attacking Muslim governments has regained currency now that IS is foundering), or there is more grassroots animosity in the West. But even then we will be looking at the same orders of magnitude for casualties unless individual attacks can be made much more effective.

Which means that the present time is for developing out security and emergency response tools, as no concrete "solution" to terrorism is forthcoming.

Is it, though?

Yes?

But more than just polling, individuals give testimony that the specter of terrorism is somehow worse than the possibility of other incident, crime or victimization in that it makes them feel unsafe at all times and in all places.

[Kagemusha]

The political issue, though, is of convincing the populace that they are in fact not much less safe than before when viscerally they reject statistical arguments. That issue is every bit as significant as actually "stopping" Islamists. Impunity in itself weighs heavily on the mind of the average citizen.

QFT

Why do you hate yourself and want muslims to take over Europe?

I love them as much as myself and any other unique snowflake.Whether a leftist hippie or right wing nutter. Just wander at my lawn and find out..

Statistics would presumably show that the number of people killed by Islamists or Islamists-inspired attackers in Europe is currently at or near an all-time high.

Here is some statistics about people being killed at terrorist attacks at Europe:

http://www.datagraver.com/case/peopl...rope-1970-2015

I know already that you are going to say that this does not dish out Islamist terrorist. My reply is that there always will be nutters out there who want to kill other people for some marvelous cause. Statistically there are less victims of terrorism then in the past.

[HopAlongBunny]

The numbers are less meaningful than the story.
No it doesn't rise to the level (in body count) as the storming of Juno or Omaha; the numbers pale to insignificance when compared to say traffic deaths.
But the stories, sell papers and drive clicks so we get a steady supply (framed in fact or "enhanced")
It counts because it is the narrative we get; you could go further of course, say painting it as the puppet show we get to distract from "inconvenient" stories/narratives.

[Viking]

We're at a ceiling for the time being, unless or until a much more powerful internationalist organization arises with ideology calling for a focus on the West (Al Qaeda's long-war focus on attacking Muslim governments has regained currency now that IS is foundering), or there is more grassroots animosity in the West. But even then we will be looking at the same orders of magnitude for casualties unless individual attacks can be made much more effective.

Then there's also the factor of immigration, which is continuously creating a larger pool to draw potential attackers from.

it makes them feel unsafe at all times and in all places.

Do you have a source for this? How many?

Statistically there are less victims of terrorism then in the past.

With the exception of jihadist-related attacks, as shown in graph 3.

There will 'always' be the danger to people's lives from this and that, but of course we should still try to minimise such risks.

The numbers are less meaningful than the story.
No it doesn't rise to the level (in body count) as the storming of Juno or Omaha; the numbers pale to insignificance when compared to say traffic deaths.
But the stories, sell papers and drive clicks so we get a steady supply (framed in fact or "enhanced")
It counts because it is the narrative we get; you could go further of course, say painting it as the puppet show we get to distract from "inconvenient" stories/narratives.

If you want the media to focus on the things that kill the most people rather than the things that are the most spectacular, you've only just started. I don't think there would much room for Trump's travel ban or his groping comments in this new media landscape.

[Dâriûsh]

The buffoons in the Iranian RG have fallen for Trumps provocations.

"If we see smallest misstep from the enemies, our roaring missiles will fall on their heads."

Depicted: the glorious roaring missiles of the Islamic Revolution