Lets get it into perspective, over 16,000 hrs on jets, according to my log (and roughly worked out) about every 1700 hrs I had a turn back or some sort of engine failure, (big and small). This is on the DC9, B747, A300, 747/200/300.
I know you have had quite a career Mr Green, but the original JT9's and JT8's were extremely unreliable engines compared to their modern counterparts.
The old jumbo engines used to flame out if you gassed it too quick and had a hole drilled in the throttle quadrant for a pin to be installed after engine start as a nasty work around to stop the engine being retarded back to full idle or it would flame out.
The RB211 in its first incarnation nearly sent Rolls Royce broke because it kept exploding.
Today jet engines are a mature technology, as can be demonstrated by some of the old RB211's on the wings of some Qantas aircraft, they went years beyond what was expected before they were due for overhaul.
It's the fact that as engines became more reliable that the idea of ETOPS became viable and killed off the 3 engined aircraft.
A mature, fully evolved engine such as the RB211 on the 744's shouldn't be exploding randomly like they are at the moment. Apparently its not a safety issue because there are 4 engines. The SFO failure included the turbin disk being ejected out the side, lucky it was away from the aircraft unlike QF32's.
Was QF32 with its 1 exploding engine 'not a safety issue' ?