Which group has killed 900 in Britain in 6 years?

[blake]

And it says that 829 people have been killed in ETA attacks and 191 in the Madrid bombings.

 

That 829 - and many of the killed were police and army, and not random civilians - is over a FIFTY YEAR PERIOD.

 

Spanish Islamist attacks,

- of which Madrid was only one - have only been going on for 15.

 

Take away all the Spanish police and army from the ETA figures and just concentrate on civilians which form the massive majority of the Islamist terrorist murders, and you will find that on a year-on- year basis, since Islamist terrorism started in Spain, the annual average loss of life has been greater.

 

And in most countries in Europe, or indeed the world for that matter, the worst terrorism-related incidents they have ever had, were all recently in the last 20 years.

[Bob Arctor]

Can domestic homocide be prevented as such? With the exception of possibly shelters I'm not sure what can be done. It's not always easy to predict.

 

Yes, to an extent. Each domestic homicide generates a domestic homicide review and these are studied to pick out themes and warning signs. Once you've read through a few they start to sound quite similar, because they are. So there are situations where people who know about such things (primarily the police) should be alert to the possibility of a specific person killing a known victim. If that was in the context of a terror threat then that suspect would come under surveillance and the security services would look to arrest them before they did anything. With domestic homicides it's far more likely that the victim will just be given some safety advice (if that) and police action only taken after they've been killed.

 

I'm not saying that domestic homicide should be policed exactly like terrorism but I do think the two are given very different priorities.

[Cyclone]

That 829 - and many of the killed were police and army, and not random civilians - is over a FIFTY YEAR PERIOD.

 

Spanish Islamist attacks,

- of which Madrid was only one - have only been going on for 15.

 

Take away all the Spanish police and army from the ETA figures and just concentrate on civilians which form the massive majority of the Islamist terrorist murders, and you will find that on a year-on- year basis, since Islamist terrorism started in Spain, the annual average loss of life has been greater.

 

And in most countries in Europe, or indeed the world for that matter, the worst terrorism-related incidents they have ever had, were all recently in the last 20 years.

 

So to summarise, when you said ETA had killed less people than the Madrid bombings, you were completely wrong.

When you said that terrorism was at it's highest level ever, you were completely wrong.

[blake]

Worst terrorist attack in British history : 7/7

 

Spain : Madrid 2004

 

France : 2015

 

And it's not just Europe. In Africa and Asia too, you name any country, and the chances are - with some exceptions - that their worst terrorist attack, ever, occurred within the last 20 years.

[Litotes]

Worst terrorist attack in British history : 7/7

 

Spain : Madrid 2004

 

France : 2015

 

And it's not just Europe. In Africa and Asia too, you name any country, and the chances are - with some exceptions - that their worst terrorist attack, ever, occurred within the last 20 years.

 

Antarctica... (is it a country?... discuss)

 

Germany (1972)

Greece (1988)

Italy (1980)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Europe

 

"chances are"

 

So again no facts to back up your wild assertion?

[Cyclone]

Worst terrorist attack in British history : 7/7

 

Spain : Madrid 2004

 

France : 2015

 

And it's not just Europe. In Africa and Asia too, you name any country, and the chances are - with some exceptions - that their worst terrorist attack, ever, occurred within the last 20 years.

 

Still pretending Lockerbie didn't happen then?

[blake]

Lockerbie wasn't an attack on a British target at all. Whoever did it, they obviously wanted the plane to explode in mid-Atlantic and it was a pure fluke that 11 British people on the ground in Scotland (as well as some on the plane) lost their lives.

 

And although Lockerbie wasn't an Islamist religiously motivated attack, it wasn't an IRA one either and emanated from the Middle East.

 

Whereas 7/7, which caused two and a half times the amount the biggest IRA bomb ever did, definitely was an attack on a British target. Lockerbie wasn't.

 

There are exceptions. Norway, obviously. And even Italy and Germany, unlike Britain, France, Spain, Belgium and others, have not yet had a modern Islamist attack that's been worse than others they suffered previously. But in most countries, not just in Europe but also the wider world, the recent Islamist terrorist attacks are the worst they've ever had.

[Bob Arctor]

Lockerbie wasn't an attack on a British target at all. Whoever did it, they obviously wanted the plane to explode in mid-Atlantic and it was a pure fluke that 11 British people on the ground in Scotland (as well as some on the plane) lost their lives.

 

And although Lockerbie wasn't an Islamist religiously motivated attack, it wasn't an IRA one either and emanated from the Middle East.

 

Whereas 7/7, which caused two and a half times the amount the biggest IRA bomb ever did, definitely was an attack on a British target. Lockerbie wasn't.

 

There are exceptions. Norway, obviously. And even Italy and Germany, unlike Britain, France, Spain, Belgium and others, have not yet had a modern Islamist attack that's been worse than others they suffered previously. But in most countries, not just in Europe but also the wider world, the recent Islamist terrorist attacks are the worst they've ever had.

 

You and Cyclone have gone way off topic. If you want to argue about the terror league table maybe you could start your own thread.

[Cyclone]

Lockerbie wasn't an attack on a British target at all. Whoever did it, they obviously wanted the plane to explode in mid-Atlantic and it was a pure fluke that 11 British people on the ground in Scotland (as well as some on the plane) lost their lives.

 

And although Lockerbie wasn't an Islamist religiously motivated attack, it wasn't an IRA one either and emanated from the Middle East.

 

Whereas 7/7, which caused two and a half times the amount the biggest IRA bomb ever did, definitely was an attack on a British target. Lockerbie wasn't.

 

There are exceptions. Norway, obviously. And even Italy and Germany, unlike Britain, France, Spain, Belgium and others, have not yet had a modern Islamist attack that's been worse than others they suffered previously. But in most countries, not just in Europe but also the wider world, the recent Islamist terrorist attacks are the worst they've ever had.

 

Lockerbie happened over the UK in UK airspace, you can claim you know where it was "supposed" to happen, but the only thing that matters is where it DID happen.

The statistics are quite clear, terrorism isn't at it's worst ever, the late 70's had a higher death toll and a higher number of attacks.

[blake]

Lockerbie wasn't an attack on a British target. The bomb was intended to go off in mid Atlantic, few of the victims were British, and not many of them even had any connection with Britain at all worth mentioning.

 

Whereas ALL of the victims of 7/7 or for that matter the biggest IRA bomb which only caused 25% of the number of casualties that 7/7 did were either British or had some connection with the country.