ATTACK IN SYDNEY - Car filled with gas canisters rammed into police station

[May90]

And how is that any different, other than one is more expressive than the other? People thought I meant it in a literal sense, they are either foolish or liars if they couldn't figure out what I meant. Either way it makes them look bad

You really need me to explain how words "attack" and "war" have different meanings? If someone attacks you for being a male, will you call it "war on males"?

[Narwal]

Two mentally-deranged veterans kill 8 police officers, and now it's a war?

The war on the police started long ago, it's only now getting more deadly as the rhetoric continues to escalate against them and boils over. That war on the police was continued by Obama and his administration with their rhetoric of choice against them. He tends to "not comment" on things under investigation, except when it comes to police incidents. In that case, he doesn't need the facts to spout off his own opinions, one which echos the sentiment of continuing the war on police.

The President and his administration are the powers that be, that can force sanctions on police forces for abuse. He can help fix the problem, if there is one, while at the same time diffusing the hate rhetoric against the police based on his the work his administration is doing to rectify the problem. His choice to escalate the issue against the police, is ironic given how he believes the police should learn to diffuse situations rather than escalate them. What we see is a President who does not practice what he preaches. I digress though, when have the people in power ever felt they needed to obey the same rules as us?

[zenkai]

No, colloquial is common use. Calling events a war on something isn't common use, it's sensational. Otherwise, people are at war with traffic more than anything else...

When group A of people are dying thanks to the influence of group B, I don't think it's sensationalism.

- - - Updated - - -

You really need me to explain how words "attack" and "war" have different meanings? If someone attacks you for being a male, will you call it "war on males"?

It's sad you can't understand the difference yourself

[Etselion]

Who won the war on Christmas last year?

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

It's pretty much the definition of colloquialism. You can't declare war on recess, but that's a term I've heard many times.

Yeah, I am not sure why they are fighting people over the usage.

I have heard the term "War on Soda" when Mayor Bloomberg wanted to outlaw certain XL sizes of pop in New York City.

[May90]

Who won the war on Christmas last year?

I only know that Rick Perry lost it. Hmm... Obama won, I guess?

[Tinykong]

No, colloquial is common use. Calling events a war on something isn't common use, it's sensational. Otherwise, people are at war with traffic more than anything else...

That's my point, people (at least where I live) use this term a lot to describe when people are going against something. A war on recess, a war on sugar, a war on fat people.

If that was taken literally, it would sound like school children and fat people were dying left and right. Really it's just a term that people use to describe a movement that is attacking or going after something.

[Nynax]

What word would you use when people are attacking a group of people based on actions of individuals in said group?

I am sure you say the same thing when people say things like "war on women" I guess you people never heard of a phrase and take everything in a literal sense.

- - - Updated - - -



Thank you, glad someone on these forums has common sense

Well to be fair you did respond to him with "you don't need tanks and guns to be at war" instead of just saying "I don't mean a literal one." :P

But honestly, It's more of a personal thing and I hate the way the media and others use it to sensationalize because it devalues the concept of actual War in the minds of the public. I don't know if most people remember but theres at least two wars going on in the middle east, but because the public has no concept of what an actual war is, and plenty of fear for ourselves, we seem to have no sympathy towards the massive human migration its caused.

And then labeling everything as a "war on ____" here just servers to polarize everyone more, get people angrier and angrier. I'm sure it helps get more viewers though, so yay $$$! But in the case of police, it's only going to make things worse. It's a rhetoric that escalates "there are problems and grievances that need to be addressed" to "we (police one side, blacks other side) have to protect ourselves, in this "war" against us." And then shit gets violent on a larger scale.

My biggest fear right now is that Police organizations are going to lose their cool, and completely crack down on all non-registered illegal protests. And with emotions and tensions this high, that would push more people towards a sense of having no recourse but violence. And then there really might be a war as the spiral of escalation begins.

[zenkai]

Well to be fair you did respond to him with "you don't need tanks and guns to be at war" instead of just saying "I don't mean a literal one." :P

But honestly, It's more of a personal thing and I hate the way the media and others use it to sensationalize because it devalues the concept of actual War in the minds of the public. I don't know if most people remember but theres at least two wars going on in the middle east, but because the public has no concept of what an actual war is, and plenty of fear for ourselves, we seem to have no sympathy towards the massive human migration its caused.

And then labeling everything as a "war on ____" here just servers to polarize everyone more, get people angrier and angrier. I'm sure it helps get more viewers though, so yay $$$! But in the case of police, it's only going to make things worse. It's a rhetoric that escalates "there are problems and grievances that need to be addressed" to "we (police one side, blacks other side) have to protect ourselves, in this "war" against us." And then shit gets violent on a larger scale.

My biggest fear right now is that Police organizations are going to lose their cool, and completely crack down on all non-registered illegal protests. And with emotions and tensions this high, that would push more people towards a sense of having no recourse but violence. And then there really might be a war as the spiral of escalation begins.

In my defense I gave him too much credit to figure it out on his own, I thought it was self evident.

Good post though, thank you for that, those are getting more rare these days. I think police have to fear for their life, more than normal that is, you never know when and were the next triggered person will strike next. The numbers of Police being killed is on the rise thanks to the issues they are facing.

[May90]

That's my point, people (at least where I live) use this term a lot to describe when people are going against something. A war on recess, a war on sugar, a war on fat people.

If that was taken literally, it would sound like school children and fat people were dying left and right. Really it's just a term that people use to describe a movement that is attacking or going after something.

I get what you are saying, but it has nothing to do with what the OP described as "war". Sure, there is "war on terrorism" inside the US, which apparently doesn't have people running around with guns, shooting hordes of terrorists. There is, however, some kind of global action taken, the entire country introducing federal and state policies aimed at fighting the terrorists and the possibility of terrorist attacks.

In contrast, here we have two anti-police mass shootings in many months, if not years, both committed by random psychos who had nothing to do with any movements/organizations and acted on their own. If this is "war", then any school fight is war.

[Tinykong]

I get what you are saying, but it has nothing to do with what the OP described as "war". Sure, there is "war on terrorism" inside the US, which apparently doesn't have people running around with guns, shooting hordes of terrorists. There is, however, some kind of global action taken, the entire country introducing federal and state policies aimed at fighting the terrorists and the possibility of terrorist attacks.

In contrast, here we have two anti-police mass shootings in many months, if not years, both committed by random psychos who had nothing to do with any movements/organizations and acted on their own. If this is "war", then any school fight is war.

There is also a war on the police. Police shootings are pretty rare. There are hundreds of thousands maybe even millions of interactions every single day between the police and citizens that result in nothing out of the ordinary.

[May90]

There is also a war on the police. Police shootings are pretty rare. There are hundreds of thousands maybe even millions of interactions every single day between the police and citizens that result in nothing out of the ordinary.

So what constitutes the "war on the police" then?

[Tinykong]

So what constitutes the "war on the police" then?

A lot of people getting angry and directing it at something.

[unbound]

A few officers die and now it's "war on police"

Where was the war on police and media when white patriot groups were attacking and killing officers?

Shhhh. Conservative attacks are not to be talked about here. Nor are we to talk about armed conservative groups taking over federal land. Only liberal and non-white attacks actually count...

[May90]

A lot of people getting angry and directing it at something.

Just getting angry is by no means a war on something. A war on something would mean people taking some real action, having real consequences. Not just doing some protests somewhere and then walking home.

[Tinykong]

Just getting angry is by no means a war on something. A war on something would mean people taking some real action, having real consequences. Not just doing some protests somewhere and then walking home.

That's not how the term is used, which was my point. People say that schools have declared "war on recess" because they are trying to remove it from school schedules. People say that New York is declaring "war on sugar" by trying to ban large soda cups. Or a "war on fat people" by shaming them in public places.

I would say that the current social media atmosphere surrounding the hate directed towards the police is a "war on the police" in the same way.

Feel free to disagree, this is way off topic now.

[May90]

That's not how the term is used, which was my point. People say that schools have declared "war on recess" because they are trying to remove it from school schedules. People say that New York is declaring "war on sugar" by trying to ban large soda cups. Or a "war on fat people" by shaming them in public places.

I would say that the current social media atmosphere surrounding the hate directed towards the police is a "war on the police" in the same way.

Feel free to disagree, this is way off topic now.

Well, let's agree to disagree then. I see your point, but I do not think anything that is happening in social media is relevant in any way.

[Themius]

Well in another thread he said Arab men are more likely to rape, so maybe his racial views are out of whack.

Men from the arab world are more likely to rape when in the western world. I mean they're more likely but barely, there's only like 1-1.6% more of the total population that rapes when compared to most native populations which is small. Note how I tell the "whole" story here.

[Slant]

Fortunately, the average terrorist (and yes, he is likely Muslim, are you happy ? But that also includes white would-be terrorists) is neither very mechanically inclined or even very bright.

You instantly lose all credibility when you say BLM are terrorists. Criminals would be stretching it.

Well, they're clearly accepting criminal elements in their strategy.

[Sama-81]

Men from the arab world are more likely to rape when in the western world. I mean they're more likely but barely, there's only like 1-1.6% more of the total population that rapes when compared to most native populations which is small. Note how I tell the "whole" story here.

Where is that data from? Bit curious, since the official data here shows the discrepancy to be MUCH larger than that.