Cost of Islamic terrorism

Neon Knight wrote:Yeah. Although the chance of being harmed by terrorism is very low, it's easy to forget how much time and effort goes into keeping it down. The West could do without that cost.

But I notice in that article it says the U.S. spends ten times more on anti-terrorist measures than France. That is a great difference and I wonder what exactly they are doing.

Sary wrote:The United States is a much larger country than France,so that would naturally account for a higher amount of money going towards anti terrorism.
But yes,I wonder too where all of the hard earned money that I pay in taxes goes towards.  It is a shame that so much of it funneled into wars and national security,I would much rather see my tax dollars go to science and technology.

The recent Las Vagas attack ,carried out by a fellow American,targeting innocent people is disgusting. How does a country protect its self from its own citizens?

Neon Knight wrote:

Sary wrote:The United States is a much larger country than France,so that would naturally account for a higher amount of money going towards anti terrorism.
But yes,I wonder too where all of the hard earned money that I pay in taxes goes towards.  It is a shame that so much of it funneled into wars and national security,I would much rather see my tax dollars go to science and technology.

The recent Las Vagas attack ,carried out by a fellow American,targeting innocent people is disgusting. How does a country protect its self from its own citizens?

The main argument I've heard for gun ownership from Americans is that it is necessary for citizens to protect themselves in the event of a future hostile government. That sounds rather paranoid to me. Where do you stand on the issue? Many Americans seem to have a kind of religious attachment to gun rights - something much more emotional than rational.

Sary wrote:The recent Las Vagas attack ,carried out by a fellow American, targeting innocent people is disgusting. How does a country protect its self from its own citizens?

Are we growing our own terrorists, or are people more prone to mental illness becoming psychopaths ?

I think that the media, Hollywood with all of its violence  and gore, guns, killing, glorified in TV and movies now mix that in with drugs, illegal as well as prescription, the breakdown of traditional families and religion. It is obvious what is happening, but how do you stop it, turn it around, like a speeding train

Most people feel that it will only get worse.

Spoiler:

Sary wrote:My goodness Neon Knight,that is a whole lot of rules and regulations!

Sterilize unfit girls......that sounds like eugenics to me,like what the nazis were attempting to do.  Limiting technology ,more taxes and censorship that will surely take away freedoms, make for an oppressive society.

What would the benefits be, for the people, living in country with so many rules and laws?
Do you envision that if all of the laws were implemented and people obeyed that this will be a pleasant place to live and raise a family?

Neon Knight wrote:

Sary wrote:The recent Las Vagas attack ,carried out by a fellow American, targeting innocent people is disgusting. How does a country protect its self from its own citizens?

Are we growing our own terrorists, or are people more prone to mental illness becoming psychopaths ?

I think that the media, Hollywood with all of its violence  and gore, guns, killing, glorified in TV and movies now mix that in with drugs, illegal as well as prescription, the breakdown of traditional families and religion. It is obvious what is happening, but how do you stop it, turn it around, like a speeding train

Most people feel that it will only get worse.

To your list I would add the over-use of technology which is causing more individualism as well as damaging the environment. I don't see religion making a come-back in the face of all our scientific knowledge. But politics is the art of the possible, so let's consider a batch of solutions:

* Increase censorship standards for films and TV programmes.
* Restrict immigration much more (dah!) while introducing 'family friendly' work and tax policies.
* Identify and sterilise girls who would not be fit to raise children.
* Experiment with legalising drugs to see if it reduces crime. If it doesn't then start executing drug dealers, big and small.
* Limit car ownership to one per household, with exceptions for houses where people work for the emergency services.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_car_on_societies
* Stop the lending and borrowing debt culture.
* Put high taxes on mobile phones to make them a true luxury.
* Ban wi-fi transmitters and/or broadband to slow down the internet, make it less appealing in general and reduce use of social media.

This would all take great political will, of course - a moral revolution. But either we care or we don't.

EDIT: Some of these changes could be made gradually, of course, to give chance for adjustment.

Neon Knight wrote:

Sary wrote:My goodness Neon Knight,that is a whole lot of rules and regulations!

Sterilize unfit girls......that sounds like eugenics to me,like what the nazis were attempting to do.  Limiting technology ,more taxes and censorship that will surely take away freedoms, make for an oppressive society.

What would the benefits be, for the people, living in country with so many rules and laws?
Do you envision that if all of the laws were implemented and people obeyed that this will be a pleasant place to live and raise a family?

I was just trying to answer your question of how to stop things getting worse and turn them back. I don't see those rules making for an oppressive society but for a simpler one with less stress and more socialisation. I wouldn't force unfit girls to be sterilised but would give them large money incentives to accept it. Girls like that nearly always end up having children with irresponsible boys and those children grow up to be criminals or drug addicts. That process has to be stopped.

If you don't like the Holywood violence culture then why not tougher censorship? I'm not talking about going back to the prudish standards of the 1950s but the moderate ones of, say, the 1970s. Same with technology. There would still be advanced computer games, e-mail and internet shopping but less incentive to spend loads of time on social media. Think what it was like around 2000 before it all went crazy with all the porn and TwitterBook stuff.

It seems obvious to me that a large % of people are not capable of making wise lifestyle choices. And those who are capable can find it hard to escape the materialistic, digital, consumer culture when everything is geared to it.

Sary wrote:You speak the truth,on many of the problems facing society.  I personally would probably have no trouble living in that type of world.

I just don't think that type of society would be exceptable to the majority of people.  A lot of what you propose is old fashioned,patriarchal. how you can close the door now, and go back to the way things use to be. The change has already happened. Mostly all for the worst.  It would require a very strong leader to turn things around at this point.

magyar_lány wrote:OMG This list is really shocking. If I would be a writer this would be a great material for a distopia. Btw. what will happen to the unfit boys? Some of them will be an agressive or abusive father. (I hope I didn't write any offending to you).