If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Is al Qaeda setting forest fires in Europe?   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 97
    More: Scary, al-Qaeda, Europe, Federal Security Service, wildfires  
•       •       •

8268 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2012 at 12:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



97 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-05 02:29:32 AM

adeist69: "More than 184,000 hectares of land in Spain alone were destroyed by fires between January 1 and September 16, according to its agriculture ministry, the highest amount in a decade."



I suck at metrics, how many Rhode Islands is that?


Two furlongs shy of ten fathoms.
 
2012-10-05 02:38:12 AM

GAT_00: ZAZ: Has Europe, like America, suppressed natural forest fires over wide areas? Could Al Qaeda be doing the ecology a favor by restoring fire to its natural place?

There's a registered voter out there going, "Well, now that I see al Queda is in favor of fire..."


Is the governor of wyoming going to accuse them of fringe environmentalism?
 
2012-10-05 02:38:47 AM

davidphogan: I remember hearing rumors in 2003 about the Cedar Fires in San Diego that people thought it was the work of Al Qaeda



I bet they tortured a few dozen Muslims just to be sure.
 
2012-10-05 02:40:10 AM

JesusJuice: If we were really serious about ending terror, this is the strategy we'd pursue. Mohammed would think twice if he knew that after he blew himself up we were going to find and kill his entire family.



Obviously terrorism is a completely new phenomenon and nobody ever tried that in the past. I'm sure it will work. Go ahead and try.
 
2012-10-05 02:47:24 AM
i1048.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-05 02:55:32 AM

xaveth: Bu...bu...but Obama did a Chuck Norris roundhouse kick to Obama's face and killed him.


Which was a fine thing, but it's undercut just a tad by our decades-long policy of both parties giving my tax dollars to religious dictatorships that fund this shiat.
 
2012-10-05 03:11:18 AM
Al Qaeda cancelled Firefly.
 
2012-10-05 03:18:13 AM
As with all question headlines:

No.

/the fark do you people actually bother debating this idiocy?
 
2012-10-05 03:27:08 AM
Where is Smacky the Frog now that we need him?
 
2012-10-05 04:42:29 AM
This story sounds like crap.

What extremist websites say this? It's not hard to link such things. Personally I doubt they exist and if they do I would want to know their 'true' origins.

But now that the idea is out there, no doubt we will really have some peeps try/do it.

Terror (or more politically correctly 'Shock and Awe') is easy - getting along with each other seems more difficult.
 
2012-10-05 04:57:50 AM

indylaw: Yeah, I've never understood their strategy. As spectacularly horrific as 9/11 was, nothing had me terrified like the DC snipers, and that was just two assholes, a rifle and a Buick.


Meh - Even if I had lived in DC when that was going on, I don't think I would have been too terrified. The chances of it happening to any given person in the area is pretty small. They only killed 10 people.

There was a big fire near me a few months ago, but it never was a threat to my neighborhood so no terror for me or most of my town. It did make me rethink my desire to have a home outside of town in the mountains though. Even the people who lived there at most suffered very little terror - the ones who lost homes felt something besides terror.

To really instill terror there has to be an ongoing long-term threat. It would take a small army of DC snipers all over the country perhaps combined with a similar-sized army of suicide bombers (and/or people setting up IEDs all over) to really instill terror to any significant degree.
 
2012-10-05 05:11:56 AM
It`s either Al Queda or Climate Change

Be scared people...
 
2012-10-05 05:44:42 AM
No, they aren't.
But thanks for giving them the idea.
 
2012-10-05 06:37:19 AM

Surool: Those f*ckers! Let's go burn their desert to the ground!


Hey, that's it! Maybe they're just terraforming!
 
2012-10-05 06:52:43 AM
They also trained the drug cartels how to set fires in our National Parks. Senate resolution says so (or whatever, don't know the full story but that won't stop me from spreading it), oh taught Mexicans how to dig tunnels too.
 
2012-10-05 07:00:04 AM

Surool: Those f*ckers! Let's go burn their desert to the ground Alamogordo Glass!


FTFY
 
2012-10-05 07:09:09 AM

JesusJuice: flucto: They'd better pray to be burned to death rather than be caught with the match in their hands in Russia. Also, I would guess Mr. Putin won't stop with the guy holding the match. He's going to get medieval on their whole family.

Bad idea guys. Really, really bad idea.

If we were really serious about ending terror, this is the strategy we'd pursue. Mohammed would think twice if he knew that after he blew himself up we were going to find and kill his entire family.


I actually would doubt that. He might ask the guy who recruited him to blow himself up:"what happens if they kill my family" and the recruiter would probably say "if they die because of your martyrdom, they too will be martyrs in the eyes of Allah, and they will be with you forever in paradise, with all the benifits of martydom."

Religion and ideology can find an answer to make any stupid idea sound good.
 
2012-10-05 07:34:09 AM
When you're pissed, broke, and have nothing else to do, then anarchy!

Al Qaeda are the new punks.
 
2012-10-05 07:55:43 AM
So the CIA backed Al Qaeda needs more attention. Stay afraid.
 
2012-10-05 08:01:57 AM

Metal: Al Qaeda are the new punks.


upload.wikimedia.org

I juss wan flame flame flame.
 
2012-10-05 08:02:34 AM
I can't wait to see the TSA manning entrances to the National Parks of America.

/I think Al Qaeda keeps hiding my car keys
 
2012-10-05 08:24:28 AM
i1247.photobucket.com

Approves!
 
2012-10-05 08:32:36 AM

timujin: Contrabulous Flabtraption: Now there you go, Al Qaeda, using your head finally. There are so many cheap, easy ways to cause havoc. You don't even need to kill anyone. Set a few fires, cut down a few electrical towers, and the rest will take care of itself.

I've been wondering about this sort of thing for a while. If one were going to spread "terror" there are a lot of cheaper and easier ways to do so besides stealing planes and crashing them into buildings. Sure, that sends a big message, but then so does ... a bunch of stuff I just erased because the last thing I need to do is sit here giving assholes new ideas.


When I was younger I used to switch out the tapes of horror movies and Fat Albert cartoon boxes in Blockbuster.
 
2012-10-05 08:34:40 AM

some_beer_drinker: some people just want to see the world burn


www.meh.ro
 
2012-10-05 08:37:40 AM

Krowdaddy Chixdiggit: [i1247.photobucket.com image 320x350]

Approves!


Great, now Al Queso will go after churches.
 
2012-10-05 09:23:09 AM
I'm surprised it took this long. I always figured that starting forest fires would be the easiest way for terrorists to raise hell. A few drops of gasoline and a bic lighter, and you never get caught unless your lips are loose.

farking scary.
 
2012-10-05 09:34:41 AM
Europe still has forests? I thought it would be wall-to-wall farms and villages and commons and whatnot by now.
 
2012-10-05 10:04:19 AM

Happy Hours: To really instill terror there has to be an ongoing long-term threat. It would take a small army of DC snipers all over the country perhaps combined with a similar-sized army of suicide bombers (and/or people setting up IEDs all over) to really instill terror to any significant degree.


It sounds like you're more care-free or apathetic than most. Good for you, but if the entire country can shiat its pants over a handful of plane crashes on one day in cities that are thousands of miles away from many of them, how much more so would they be terrified if they had daily snipings in several cities in the US? And you can do that for a lot cheaper than training operatives to fly planes and then coordinating several hijackings, and there's little the government could do to prevent it or pretend like it can prevent it.

The purpose of terrorism isn't mass casualties, it's generating panic, and if you have roving snipers taking out random civilians on a frequent and consistent basis, suddenly people start locking themselves in their houses and demand that the government call in the army to police the streets and hunt for the killers.
 
2012-10-05 10:05:34 AM

Deep Contact: So the CIA backed Al Qaeda needs more attention. Stay afraid.


The TROOF is out there, for real, you guys.
 
2012-10-05 10:08:07 AM
Setting forest fires? Just goes to prove that the number of died-in-the-wool terrarists that 'hate us for our freedom" and are willing to act on their beliefs is vanishingly small. Otherwise how to explain the absence of so many extremely easy to do yet difficult to catch acts like this, at least in the US? I am sure almost all of us can think of ways we could off a few dozen or few hundred people without much effort (I won't go into details) and yet that has not happened. And it ain't because of our superior anti-terrorism efforts, which in most instances consists of entrapping some near-retarded mooslim wannabe into putting their mitts on what they think are explosives.
 
2012-10-05 10:41:43 AM
I met a guy this summer who told me, in all seriousness, that "Muslim sleeper cells" were setting all the big forest fires in the U.S.
 
2012-10-05 11:00:44 AM
Ah, good. I've been wondering for a while if Europe actually has forest fires. You never seem to hear about them.

/was in Austria in June
/spent the entire trip watching international news about... forest fires 50 miles from my home
 
2012-10-05 11:47:55 AM
They hate us for our forests.
 
2012-10-05 12:10:12 PM

m1ke: They hate us for our forests.


Almost.

They hate us for our treedom!
 
2012-10-05 12:17:29 PM

janzee: violentsalvation: Yeah they strap on incendiary bombs and sneak into unsuspecting thickets.

Didn't the Japanese do this duuring WWII? Tied incindieries on ballons and sent them into the Pacific air stream to start forest fires in the western US? Some 1000+ balloons were found in the US. Some as far inland as Wyoming...


Yes, though in return the US strapped a bunch of firebombs on to bats and set them loose on Japan. So like fark yea! USA ftw.
 
2012-10-05 12:37:35 PM
Russian state news service writes something critical about the US: "LOL, UR JUST JEALOUS RUSSIA!"
Russian state news service writes something about the infinite evil of Al-Qaeda: "OMG, ITS ALL TRUE!!!1!"
 
2012-10-05 12:50:29 PM
I was wondering who has been turning the refrigerator to the coldest setting causing my leafy greens to get freezer burn.
 
2012-10-05 01:01:50 PM

indylaw: timujin: Contrabulous Flabtraption: Now there you go, Al Qaeda, using your head finally. There are so many cheap, easy ways to cause havoc. You don't even need to kill anyone. Set a few fires, cut down a few electrical towers, and the rest will take care of itself.

I've been wondering about this sort of thing for a while. If one were going to spread "terror" there are a lot of cheaper and easier ways to do so besides stealing planes and crashing them into buildings. Sure, that sends a big message, but then so does ... a bunch of stuff I just erased because the last thing I need to do is sit here giving assholes new ideas.

Yeah, I've never understood their strategy. As spectacularly horrific as 9/11 was, nothing had me terrified like the DC snipers, and that was just two assholes, a rifle and a Buick.


My Theory? Terrorism, to actually succeed, requires:

1. An Operational Tempo frequent enough to make the threat constant in the targets' minds
2. Survivability of the Terrorism network to the point that there's no expectation that the fight can be simply "waited out"
3. A goal that's feasible to force on the target -- something the target will accede to in order to make the terror stop

The scariest thing about 9/11 -- and why it seems so small to some today -- is we did not initially know the attack was non-repeatable. You can argue as to why (drone attacks, Airport molestations security, etc), but since there wasn't a 9/11 every 3-6 months, they fail the first test right there.

The way I see it, 9/11 methods -- major strike every 3-6 months, 1000+ casualties, major property damage, major cultural/economic/military target destroyed -- would only fulfill (1) if Al-Qaeda had more solid sponsoring, more competent planning, and more competent agents in the US. Didn't happen -- couldn't happen?

However, if Al-Qaeda had gone the "thousand pinprick" route -- snipers, suicide bombers, shoot-ups and drive-bys, sabotage, etc -- they probably could have at least accomplished the first goal. They enjoyed the benefits of Malvo and the Anthrax bomber, but they never realized the potential there for really hitting at the US and Europe.
 
2012-10-05 01:03:21 PM
Ninja'd
 
2012-10-05 01:07:55 PM

qualtrough: Setting forest fires? Just goes to prove that the number of died-in-the-wool terrarists that 'hate us for our freedom" and are willing to act on their beliefs is vanishingly small. Otherwise how to explain the absence of so many extremely easy to do yet difficult to catch acts like this, at least in the US? I am sure almost all of us can think of ways we could off a few dozen or few hundred people without much effort (I won't go into details) and yet that has not happened. And it ain't because of our superior anti-terrorism efforts, which in most instances consists of entrapping some near-retarded mooslim wannabe into putting their mitts on what they think are explosives.


I would hope you're right, that would be encouraging. However, counterarguments just off the top of my head:

1. We killed most of the competent ones
2. The rest of them are still in the ME, obsessed with fighting in their own backyard first instead of "taking the fight to the enemy"
3. There's still the obsession with the "Big Hit" method. Most terrorists still fantasize about and plan for one big "Thousands Dead!" attack. Even though they're willing to die for their cause, they still want to take out huge numbers and aren't exactly excited at the thought of "Suicide Bomber attacks! 12 Dead!" as their epitaph
 
2012-10-05 02:25:20 PM
Interesting I actually commented to my wife a couple of years back that this would be something that terrorists would do at some point.
 
2012-10-05 02:26:41 PM
Al Qaeda stole one of my argyle socks. Now my left foot is cold and dirty.
 
2012-10-05 02:37:30 PM
Starting forest fires sounds easy, but there are a number of factors that make it harder than it sounds. For instance the Al Qaeda canoe trip with Burt Reynolds turned out pretty badly.
 
2012-10-05 02:52:50 PM

Deep Contact: So the CIA backed Al Qaeda needs more attention. Stay afraid.


Sshh, it's a secret.
 
2012-10-05 03:47:25 PM

Deep Contact: So the CIA backed Al Qaeda needs more attention. Stay afraid.



AQ is backed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Allies of American business interests. Stop blaming a scapegoat.
 
2012-10-05 05:28:12 PM

Teknowaffle: JesusJuice: flucto: They'd better pray to be burned to death rather than be caught with the match in their hands in Russia. Also, I would guess Mr. Putin won't stop with the guy holding the match. He's going to get medieval on their whole family.

Bad idea guys. Really, really bad idea.

If we were really serious about ending terror, this is the strategy we'd pursue. Mohammed would think twice if he knew that after he blew himself up we were going to find and kill his entire family.

I actually would doubt that. He might ask the guy who recruited him to blow himself up:"what happens if they kill my family" and the recruiter would probably say "if they die because of your martyrdom, they too will be martyrs in the eyes of Allah, and they will be with you forever in paradise, with all the benifits of martydom."

Religion and ideology can find an answer to make any stupid idea sound good.


Yeah, you're right. Guess we'll just have to kill all of them. The engineering challenges were already overcome in the 1940s, so it's definitely do-able.
 
2012-10-06 01:29:32 AM
www.geog.ucsb.edu

Propaganda repeat.
 
Displayed 47 of 97 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report