Skip to main content

"Kill their Families" says Trump. That'll work... Not!

In a recent interview, loudmouth Trump made headlines again by calling for the USA to "kill their families" in reference to Islamic terrorists. Whilst we're all naturally incensed by senseless horrors on our streets, this is clearly evil thinking. Such vile threats would have been worthy of the likes of Pol Pot and Hitler, not a candidate to become the 'leader of the land of the free'. But it's not just evil, it also demonstrates appallingly bad judgement if he believes that killing jihadist loved ones will stop them committing acts of revenge or prevent more enraged people from joining their ranks.

But whether we agree with Trump or not, the dreadful reality is that killing their families is precisely what we are doing by bombing their towns and homes. And the problem is that it makes terror attacks more likely, not less. By destroying whatever stability used to exist in the middle east, we've created dozens of desperate crazed jihadist groups all eager to prove their brand of madness is closer to what their god wants them to do than their competitor's equally barking mad idea.

I firmly believe history teaches us time and time again that interfering with religious fervour by force only inflames the problem, it never resolves it. Fanatics become more fanatical, not less when you use force to try to persuade them they're wrong. We're proving the point. We're angry about them killing us, so what do we do to stop them.... We kill a few of them (there are estimated to be around 70,000 fighters representing 15 identifiable Islamic factions in the Middle East, let alone numerous other extremist Islamic groups in Africa and Asia), and in so doing, we escalate whatever tensions already exist.

Politicians and military alike claim we're the good guys because we're using precision bombing. That's total rubbish! Read this report about Russians accidentally killing civilians. A tiny proportion of the ordinance being dropped by 'allied' bombers are expensive guided bombs. They're all dropping strings of high explosive in the hope one of them will hit a building identified by heaven knows who as a legitimate target. And if we're not killing individual fighters (tell me how a pilot flying at thousands of feet away and at hundreds of miles an hour can tell who or what they're blowing up), we're blowing up whatever slender chance the locals might have of rebuilding their future should anyone be left to clear up the rubble.

Our bombs are apparently not only intended to kill baddies, but 'slow them down' by destroying 'their infrastructure' like roads, airports, rail, power stations, oil wells and factories. The dreadful tragedy is that this 'infrastructure' we're destroying is what the people who live there will need to restore when they try to rebuild what little future their state might offer once fighting has stopped. Who's going to recreate their transport systems that took decades to reach even a pitiful state. Who's going to rebuild their water and sewage services, their train networks, their telecoms, their farms - all the sorts of things a country needs for even a rudimentary economy, let alone a self-sufficient nation protecting a content population?

We are doing precisely what the odious Trump and other angry knee-jerkers want us to do. Is this likely to make the Jihadists say "We were wrong. We should stop our terror attacks in case they bomb and attack us more", or are they more likely to say "They must leave our Caliphate. We need to attack them more to scare them off and prove their bombing doesn't work. Allah is on our side. We can't lose. The more we try to win this Jihad, the more Allah loves us and will reward us."

But the biggest ally ISIS and their chums have is Donno Trump. He wants to ban all muslims from entering the USA. That's racism pure and simple. He's PROVING to the mad mullahs that this is a holy war against the great satan. They've been claiming this all along and now Trump is agreeing. I'm very afraid that he may be about to have become responsible for a major escalation of attacks in Europe and the USA. And when they happen, he'll claim he was right all along and that this proves they all need to be kept out, or worse, maybe kicked out of America.

How do you get rid of a hornet's nest? According to Trump you kick it.


Popular posts from this blog

Phillips screws - yes I'm angry about them too

Don't get me wrong. They're a brilliant invention to assist automation and prevent screwdrivers from slipping off screw heads - damaging furniture, paintwork and fingers in the process. Interestingly they weren't invented by Mr Phillips at all, but by a John P Thompson who sold Mr P the idea after failing to commercialise it. Mr P, on the otherhand, quickly succeeded where Mr T had failed. Incredible isn't it. You don't just need a good idea, you need a great salesman and, more importantly, perfect timing to make a success out of something new. Actually, it would seem, he did two clever things (apart from buying the rights). He gave the invention to GM to trial. No-brainer #1. After it was adopted by the great GM, instead of trying to become their sole supplier of Phillips screws, he sold licenses to every other screw manufacturer in the world. A little of a lot is worth a great deal more than a lot of a little + vulnerability (watch out Apple!). My gromble is abo

Prepare for Alien Contact

I've not gone barking mad or joined some weird religious cult (aren't they all?). But I do predict that we will make contact with intelligences from other planets soon. Here's my reasoning: There are approximately 100,000,000,000 stars in our galaxy (easy way to remember this order of magnitude is it's one hundred, thousand, million). Usefully there are also approximately the same number of galaxies in the universe. And assuming every star has about the same number of planets orbiting it as our Sun, and that the Milky Way is an average size of galaxy, that means there are around 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the universe. A lot. Scientists have long debated the probability of life, as we would recognise it - reproducing, eating, etc - existing outside Earth. Most agree mathematically that it's a certainty. What they did was take all the components they believed were required for life to have evolved on Earth and then extrapolate what they know about

Introducing Product Relationship Management - it's what customers want.

Most businesses these days have Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems which store and process vasts amounts of information about us. They use this information to generate communications, amongst other things, which target us to buy their products and services. CRM is all about how a business relates to its customers: Past (keeping them loyal through aftersales and service), Present (helping them buy through bricks and clicks channels) and Future (prospecting). Most businesses will at some stage have declared themselves 'customer-centric'. They will probably have drawn diagrams on whiteboards that look something like these: But there's a problem with this whole approach of keeping the customer at the centre of your world and the focal point for everything you do. Is it what the customer wants ? Of course companies who ignore their customers eventually go out of business. And those who treat their customers well, tend to thrive. But is it really in the best inte