Cyclones Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) So most of the veterans here know that I relocated to the Philippines (Cebu) back in July. Two weeks ago I was promoted and relocated to Manila (Makati City) which I was pleased to discover was a bustling financial and commercial hub that frankly reminded me of Chicago and Manhattan. Well, today, I wake up to the news that a bomb has gone off at Glorietta Mall in Makati. Glorietta Mall along with Greenbelt mall is a trendy shopping complex...you could spend a day or two there and not see all the stores. Its less than a km from our apartment. My wife, son and I have been there 10 of the 15 days for either food, shopping, or groceries since we relocated. Our initial reaction was to head for the airport. After digesting it all, we're not sure what to do...does the law of averages say that it likely won't happen again for awhile, or what? Part of me was thinking, lets say we flash back 6 years, its the summer of 2001. We are living in New York, but get a killer offer in Manila and decide to relocate. A month later, a bomb goes off and kills some people, we say, to hell with this, I'm going back to my cushy office in the WTC, this wouldnt happen in the US. Of course we know what did happen. My question is this....are we any more likely to die here than in Lexington KY? Part of me believes that when its time for us to go, we do, regardless of where we happen to be in life. We're a little shaken by it all and our family and friends back home are worried sick. Comments/thoughts/opinions appreciated. Explosion Edited October 19, 2007 by Cyclones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Link didn't work. I'd like to know more about the bombing I guess. Was it claimed by some group? Was it aimed at anyone in particular (Americans, Westerners, etc.)? Hard to say... but I still like my chances of not being bombed back in the US more so than abroad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 There isn't an open Islamic insurgency in Kentucky. Don't f*ck with your family's safety just for $$$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 When I read the news today about this explosion I thought of you and thought "Well, I'm glad he doesn't live anywhere near Manilla." I'm not sure what to tell you, although I can certainly understand why you are shaken up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) There isn't an open Islamic insurgency in Kentucky. Don't f*ck with your family's safety just for $$$. uh, you f*ck with your family's safety for convenience or money no matter where you are or what you are doing . (for example, have you ever driven with your family in a car?) The question he should be asking is, "Is the extra money worth the (potential) extra risk?" Edited October 19, 2007 by wiegie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 We go to Kentucky every year and it is an awesome state. It's waaaay safer and nicer than Virginny. I guess I vote yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 uh, you f*ck with your family's safety for convenience or money no matter where you are or what you are doing . (for example, have you ever driven with your family in a car?) The question he should be asking is, "Is the extra money worth the (potential) extra risk?" Extra risk is the key. There is inherent risk in just living daily life. That is a given, and I am surprised you are calling me out on it.. My statement above reflect the risk above an beyond that inherent in daily life, that you have no matter where you live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Glad to hear you are ok. Can't really give you any specific advice, but if you ever come back, Kansas is a pretty safe place. We don't really have anything people want, and if you ride a bicycle the terrain is pretty flat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Extra risk is the key. There is inherent risk in just living daily life. That is a given, and I am surprised you are calling me out on it.. My statement above reflect the risk above an beyond that inherent in daily life, that you have no matter where you live. Risk is risk is risk--the analysis is the same no matter whether you classify it as "just living daily life" or otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Glad to hear you are ok. Can't really give you any specific advice, but if you ever come back, Kansas is a pretty safe place. We don't really have anything people want, and if you ride a bicycle the terrain is pretty flat. To give a real-life comparison, my Swiss mother-in-law was very happy that I didn't end up getting a job in Kansas because she was scared that her daughter would be killed by a tornado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Risk is risk is risk--the analysis is the same no matter whether you classify it as "just living daily life" or otherwise. Is this a statistical thing? Because I would assume there are levels of risk affected by the circumstances of the situation. Extreme examples would be it would carry MORE risk living in say, Baghdad, than Springfield, MO. So you would figure a cost/benefit based on the amount of risk difference between the two choices. Are you actually suggesting the risk is a stable variable, not fluctuating per situation? I'm confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Is this a statistical thing? Because I would assume there are levels of risk affected by the circumstances of the situation. Extreme examples would be it would carry MORE risk living in say, Baghdad, than Springfield, MO. So you would figure a cost/benefit based on the amount of risk difference between the two choices. Are you actually suggesting the risk is a stable variable, not fluctuating per situation? I'm confused. No--I am saying that doing cost-benefit analysis is the same no matter where you are. (As for Baghad, for the right price I would definitely go live there for a while.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Having gone through something similar with the DC sniper stuff, I would say stay the course. Running and hiding is never the answer, even when you have family to think about. I personally think that wiegie has the right of it here. It is a risk analysis and you have to determine how much extra risk there is in that situation. What you do not want to do is to have a knee jerk reaction to a single incident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 come back, now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Having gone through something similar with the DC sniper stuff, I would say stay the course. Running and hiding is never the answer, even when you have family to think about. I personally think that wiegie has the right of it here. It is a risk analysis and you have to determine how much extra risk there is in that situation. What you do not want to do is to have a knee jerk reaction to a single incident. This is spot on. Does a single bombing (and we don't know the details of that yet) cause you to ship out? Probably not. If Manila turns into a total war zone, that's a completely different situation. Personally, I would stay put. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffraff Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 A propane tank blew up in Tacoma on the 6th of October, should I pack up and move to Canada? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclones Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 A propane tank blew up in Tacoma on the 6th of October, should I pack up and move to Canada? I wasn't really after the sarcasm, but you're right, at least to an extent. There is risk in most of the things we do. The big difference is, in Lexington KY, I don't ever have even a shred of worry when I go out and do something. This incident now causes us to mentally be at the very least unsure, and at most scared, when we leave the friendly confines of our condo. I agree with Ursa and Kid...one incident does not a trend make. Our likely course of action will be to stay, but if this happens again in the near future, we will strongly consider leaving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 To give a real-life comparison, my Swiss mother-in-law was very happy that I didn't end up getting a job in Kansas because she was scared that her daughter would be killed by a tornado. i'd be more afraid of dying of boredom in kansas than a tornado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 how can the stability of america be compared to the stablilty of phillipines? get home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 You all who are proponents of staying may want to look up the insurgency there. It isn't a single serial killer like the DC gunman. It is an organized army looking for a coup de tat. Hardly comparable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) You all who are proponents of staying may want to look up the insurgency there. It isn't a single serial killer like the DC gunman. It is an organized army looking for a coup de tat. Hardly comparable. From a brief look at Google, it seems there are two "insurgencies" there, one Islamic and the other communist. Neither would make me pack up and go at the present time, frankly. As with any place one lives, it is wise to do research on travel destinations. Just as I would steer clear of certain areas in US cities, I would steer clear of certain areas on the islands. Edited October 19, 2007 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 From a brief look at Google, it seems there are two "insurgencies" there, one Islamic and the other communist. Neither would make me pack up and go at the present time, frankly. As with any place one lives, it is wise to do research on travel destinations. Just as I would steer clear of certain areas in US cities, I would steer clear of certain areas on the islands. what 'insurgency' would make you leave? unlike bad parts of us cities, these insurgencies target places that appear safe. shopping malls, airports, businesses, restaurants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 i dunno, the way i look at it, even with stuff like that going on, you're probably still more likely to die in a car accident or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 No--I am saying that doing cost-benefit analysis is the same no matter where you are. (As for Baghad, for the right price I would definitely go live there for a while.) How about Afghanistan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Seriously, you know what is up. You are far more likely as is you family to be gutted and beheaded in the Philippines than in Kentucky. It is a cost benefit analysis. I recently turned down a job in Oklahoma for nearly the same reason. Tome being in a safe, comfy place is worth more than all the money in the world. To some people money is more important. It just depends where you are in life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.