ParanoiA Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 This is my point. We are way more likely to be killed in a car accident, but we never give this a second thought when we get into a car. It should be the same way with terrorism. Yes there are some prudent things that can be done to make terrorism harder (e.g. armored cockpit doors on airplanes, scanning of passengers/luggage, etc.). There must be; however, some sort of logic to our responses and there must be a balanced restrained response. The Boston incident showed no restraint and no balance the powers to be panicked and didn't stop to look at the situation as a whole. Would a bomb really be put in such a thin package? Would a terrorist put bright LEDs on their bomb and then place it in plain view for everyone to see? The answer to both questions is probably not. In other words the "packages" didn't pass the straight face test for being a likely terrorist act. I think you're making too big of a deal out of a mistake. And I disagree with your packaging conclusions. Would a terrorist put bright LED's on their bomb and place it in plain view? You bet. Would a bomb really be put in such a thin package? Hell yeah. Why not? Think back on 9/11... Would terrorists really hijack planes full of people with box knives? Every terrorist incident before then involved bombs and/or guns. Why would any sane person expect 5 dudes versus a plane full of passengers - depending on box knives? That wouldn't have passed the straight face test either. I think what really sucks here, is that terrorism does work. Well, it does exactly as you claimed. But that's all it does. I don't see the point in basically trivializing terrorism just because we don't want to give them the satisfaction. They are perfectly satisfied with you ignoring them and blowing you up over and over again. I think we should continue with these responses. And laugh it off when we make mistakes and pat them on the back when they're successful. Why is a restrained response necessary? One incident in 6 years and the country has come to an end? Please...we can afford to be foolish once every 6 years - makes for great humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 I think you're making too big of a deal out of a mistake. And I disagree with your packaging conclusions. Would a terrorist put bright LED's on their bomb and place it in plain view? You bet. Would a bomb really be put in such a thin package? Hell yeah. Why not? Your argument seems to be that a bomb could come in any form and therefore we shouldn't criticize those who interpret something which local law enforcement in Seattle described as "so obviously not suspicious" in a Chicken Littlesque "sky is falling" sort of way. That's fine, but why did no one ask "Wait a sec, is the sky really falling?" Instead we saw rampant overescallation to the point that they shut down large parts of the city, to the tune of however many millions of lost dollars were involved. A bomb can come in the form of ANYTHING. Substances like C4 allow you to disguise a bomb in practically any form, and unless someone exercises the common sense to make sure a response is actually warranted, there's no way of telling what suspicious objects could possibly be bombs: So how bout, say, let's not freak out unless we really have to eh? Perhaps try living our lives as if not terrorized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 I'm sure this will go a long way to that end. I can't believe the head of Cartoon Network resigned over it. I guess I knew somebody had to take the knife, but I was really hoping they would fight the city of Boston to the bitter end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Your argument seems to be that a bomb could come in any form and therefore we shouldn't criticize those who interpret something which local law enforcement in Seattle described as "so obviously not suspicious" in a Chicken Littlesque "sky is falling" sort of way. That's fine, but why did no one ask "Wait a sec, is the sky really falling?" Instead we saw rampant overescallation to the point that they shut down large parts of the city, to the tune of however many millions of lost dollars were involved. A bomb can come in the form of ANYTHING. Substances like C4 allow you to disguise a bomb in practically any form, and unless someone exercises the common sense to make sure a response is actually warranted, there's no way of telling what suspicious objects could possibly be bombs: So how bout, say, let's not freak out unless we really have to eh? Perhaps try living our lives as if not terrorized. Sure, Boston should review their procedures and adjust accordingly, but hopefully, no one will catch the "cry wolf" syndrome so that real attacks become easier or more successful. So, in the future, if they see stuff like this again, should they call the cartoon network first? Or just see if one of them is a bomb? Should they call the bomb squad or just go take a look? Or should they just laugh and ignore it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted February 10, 2007 Author Share Posted February 10, 2007 Ah, but what if those were Richard Reid's shoes! (grin) That cartoon was a riot. BTW, regarding John's comment above, it's interesting that CNN was running this story while sitting in the same building as the Cartoon Network. You'd think somebody at CN would have CNN turned on and run down the hall to straighten them out. Or maybe they did, only it wasn't to straighten them out but rather to tell them to keep going! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Sure, Boston should review their procedures and adjust accordingly, but hopefully, no one will catch the "cry wolf" syndrome so that real attacks become easier or more successful. So, in the future, if they see stuff like this again, should they call the cartoon network first? Or just see if one of them is a bomb? Should they call the bomb squad or just go take a look? Or should they just laugh and ignore it? If you're asking what policy changes I'd make, it'd be better de-escalation procedures, so they don't wind up shutting down half the city over LED signs. Sure, treat it suspiciously at first, but examine it before freaking out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KLB Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 So how bout, say, let's not freak out unless we really have to eh? Perhaps try living our lives as if not terrorized. This cartoon perfectly depicts my point about the LED signs. The moment we start instantly thinking any anomaly or unusual package is a terrorist bomb is the moment that the terrorists have won. The terrorists no longer need to do anything but threaten terrorist acts because a paranoid society will cripple itself by freaking out about every little anomaly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now