It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.K. Terror Chief Warns Of 15-Year Fight

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   

U.K. Terror Chief Warns Of 15-Year Fight


www.cbsnews.com

AP) Britain's new security chief warned the battle against terrorism could take up to 15 years, while Prime Minister Gordon Brown said in an interview broadcast Sunday he wanted an expanded European system to share information on potential threats.

"I want the system that we are trying to expand between Europe _ a system whereby we know who are potential terrorist suspects," Brown told Sky News television.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.foxnews.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Al Qaeda evil spreading like vermin across the UK




posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I was under the assumption that the U.S. led war on terror had helped alleviate the threats of terrorism, both in Europe, and the USA.

Perhaps the 15 year time-line is a bit optimistic. There seems to be a growing environment of hatred among Muslims, and where the population of Muslims is high, so are the threats of Islamic terror attacks.

If the battle against this form of terrorism threats, takes up to 15 years, what measures will they ultimately include in this "battle"?

Perhaps containment? Camps?

If the number of potential threats are in the thousands, and possibly growing, what can be done to lower the risk to the U.K.?

www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 8-7-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 06:42 PM
link   


Perhaps containment? Camps?


Isnt that what we thought world war 2 for?.... To stop this kind of abuses against humanity??? If they did introduce camps cotainment, we would be worse than the Nazis during WW2 Those who died for our freedoms would be turning in their graves. So no Camps are not the answer.

Have to remember the UK has had terroism around more than any other country. An no matter what we do to try an defeat it. If they want to kill us no containment or anything other measures will stop them.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Isnt that what we thought world war 2 for?.... To stop this kind of abuses against humanity???


If the U.K. is hit with either a rash of suicide attacks, or a major attack on a similar scale to what happened in the U.S. on 9/11/01, it is possible that detainment/containment camps will be deemed a necessary evil, perhaps an evil the public will accept in the aftermath of possible disastrous attacks. Much as the Japanese camps of WWII were in the U.S.

In that type of scenario, there may be no outcry from the public for unjust captivity of the "Muslim extremist threats"

Just food for thought.

[edit on 8-7-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:39 PM
link   
I dont think Internment camps are feasable and would cause more problems than they would be worth, 15 years is rather optimistic if you ask me. The key to ending (Islamic Terror) (I dont consider the terrorist in this case to be true Moslems) is in cultivating good relationships with moderate moslems because in the end (Islamic Terrorists) will kill a moderate moslems just as they would a Christain Jew Athiest or Hindu.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Maybe the United States shouldn't have given Al-Qaeda 6 billion dollars back in 1989-1992 after the soviet war? Seems like a bit of a bad idea now as current events unfold. Or maybe this was their plan all along. I tend to believe the latter.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 12:42 AM
link   
15yrs is feasable, so long as we leave Iraq, talk to ME nations and accept some people wont value the same things we do.

Camps?
If muslims are po'd now, imagine what putting them in squaller/refugree camps would cause?

Truth is, WE are causing muslims to hate us with our actions, so why even attempt to continue



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:38 AM
link   
If Britain would get rid of the muslim terrorism in 15 years they'd still have IRA to keep them busy with. I don't really understand how that 15 year timeline would be possible without some very drastic measures (like getting out of Middle-East). UK could've managed to get rid of IRA by letting Northern Ireland go, but they didn't do that, and they don't even have oil in Ireland... (OK OK I know it isn't that easy and clear cut, but you get my drift, right?)



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Count
If Britain would get rid of the muslim terrorism in 15 years they'd still have IRA to keep them busy with. I don't really understand how that 15 year timeline would be possible without some very drastic measures (like getting out of Middle-East). UK could've managed to get rid of IRA by letting Northern Ireland go, but they didn't do that, and they don't even have oil in Ireland... (OK OK I know it isn't that easy and clear cut, but you get my drift, right?)


Hello.

Please read up on the history of the IRA and the current arrangements in Northern Ireland.

You will be suprised.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:18 AM
link   
I think it's high time we admitted to ourselves that the war in the Middle East is not bringing their numbers down. In fact, waging war over there is EXACTLY what the terrorist organizations need to grow, and increase their power.

Essentially, for every terrorist you kill, his family and friends take up arms to avenge the death... quite often this means dozens of new recruits for the terrorist organizations. Which is exactly what they want.

Evidently, they want revenge against the west for our long history of issues with them. We've done ALOT to them over the years, and I'm certainly not surprised at their anger. They don't have the technology we have to seek their revenge with, so they have to resort to some pretty dirty tactics.

Basically, the only way to disarm a terrorist organization is to silence them. No witnesses, no publicity, and DEFINITELY NO OPEN WAR. Waging war with these people is the one thing that will ensure their survival.

The war is making things ALOT worse. I tried from the start to let people know, but I was always met with hostility, and "un-american" accusations.

So be it. I see their side, and our side... and I'm staying as far from it as I can.

If you want your war, trust me, it's coming... you can go ahead and watch your friends die just like every war that has passed. But this enemy knows no rules of engagement, and the civilian populace IS their target.

Enjoy.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   
Firstly, its ridiculous to try and put a figure on this, and I'm suprised the guy was stupid enough to do it.

Secondly, our grandfathers fought in WW2 to prevent people from being put into containment camps. Thats never going to happen in the UK.

The only way to solve these problems is to stop sticking our noses in where they aren't welcome. After that a constructive dialogue is possible.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   
15 years is indeed an optimistic assumption (even if the Brits don't start harassing some other nation in the meantime). When will people understand, that poking into a hornets' nest will get you stung. I'll accept I'm wrong in saying this only when "terrorists" start bombing Iceland and Krakatoa.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Firstly, its ridiculous to try and put a figure on this, and I'm suprised the guy was stupid enough to do it.


Indeed. But, the media have their sound bite now.


Originally posted by neformore
Secondly, our grandfathers fought in WW2 to prevent people from being put into containment camps. Thats never going to happen in the UK.


Us British were the inventors of the concentration camp. We also interned foreign civilians during the World Wars. It is entirely feasible that we could do the same again. The same laws allowing it the first time round still sit on the statute books. The only thing preventing such a situation is the Human Rights Act, but that can be ignored if a State of Emergency is declared.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
The 15 year effort, Britain' s new security chief mentioned, is most likely just a 'bone' thrown out there for the voting public.

because i don't see a hint at monitoring the Mosques and Madrasses
or any leaning towards silencing or if needed arresting then deporting
the clerics calling for jihad or showing tolerance/acceptance of violence
by 'elements' within their Muslim community.


The PM knows full well that InterPol and other agencies, including the FBI,
all share their dossiers on known terrorists...
this ramping up with the EU he suggests, could only be realized as something on the order of 'profiling' just about everyone...
freedom of movement to be had Only if one possesses the required IDs & passports ( the dreaded 'Papers' the nazis always demanded)


Next, it would take a period of time to sway public opinion that 'Camps'
were not for 'detainment' of ethnics....but rather for the "Safety" of those obvious immigrants
from the rising vigilante' justice metted out by the true heritaged Anglos having a history in Britain.


Since i see no hints at any of these measures in the battle vs. radical terrorism...
i can only deduce that the '15 year' campaign is only the leaders whispering comforting words into the publics ear.


ADD:
just read onthe web 'Interpol chief blasts UK cooperaton on terrorism'
www.reuters.com...

? proof that someone's blowing smoke? Interpol says UK is dragging it's heels....not Interpol

[edit on 9-7-2007 by St Udio]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Looks like US Iraq chief warns of long war too:


News BBC

The head of US forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, has told the BBC that fighting the insurgency is a "long term endeavour" which could take decades. Speaking to the BBC's John Simpson in Baquba, Gen Petraeus said there was evidence that the recent troops surge was producing gains on the ground. But he warned that US forces were engaged in a "tough fight" which will get "harder before it gets easier".


So is like 15 years or more like 150 years?




posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 07:31 AM
link   


So is like 15 years or more like 150 years?


The article posted has got nothing to do, with what that general commented on in Iraq. This article posted is about UK Domestic Terroism not the War in Iraq, thought I would point that out Souljah.



Britain's new security chief warned the battle against terrorism could take up to 15 years



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
The article posted has got nothing to do, with what that general commented on in Iraq. This article posted is about UK Domestic Terroism not the War in Iraq, thought I would point that out Souljah.

And what exactly is going on in Iraq?

Wasn't this alleged Liberation of Iraq kind of a start of War on Terror?

Looks like this war is going to be a long one - on all fronts...



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Putting a term to an Ideology like fighting terror is nothing more than prepping the public to more planned conflicts by our governments in the future.

So when people complains they can comeback and said We told you SO



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join