Terrorism Worries
I assume everyone has noticed what the Bush administration is calling "increased noise" in the intelligence system regarding another al-Qaeda attack, this time of even larger proportions.
I was wondering what everyone's biggest concerns are regarding this. My take:
In some ways I feel more secure than I did. I think our government may now be doing things to prevent terror that we would say are "quasi-legal". This includes reading email and listening to phone conversations, etc on a wide spread scale using the Echelon (sp?) system. I think that there may have been a determination made at the highest levels to prevent another attack at ALL costs. These costs, in my estimation only, might include the above, as well as the public measures being taken with baggage screening, increased security, etc, and tactics such as covert law enforcement and military operations that we never hear about.
Having said that, my concerns for future attacks are:
1. Nuclear suitcase bombs
2. Suicide/homocide bombers on a large scale in the mainland US
3. Poisoning of food and/or water supply
4. Release of smallpox or other contagious agent.
5. Bioterror or dirty bombs
I was wondering what everyone's biggest concerns are regarding this. My take:
In some ways I feel more secure than I did. I think our government may now be doing things to prevent terror that we would say are "quasi-legal". This includes reading email and listening to phone conversations, etc on a wide spread scale using the Echelon (sp?) system. I think that there may have been a determination made at the highest levels to prevent another attack at ALL costs. These costs, in my estimation only, might include the above, as well as the public measures being taken with baggage screening, increased security, etc, and tactics such as covert law enforcement and military operations that we never hear about.
Having said that, my concerns for future attacks are:
1. Nuclear suitcase bombs
2. Suicide/homocide bombers on a large scale in the mainland US
3. Poisoning of food and/or water supply
4. Release of smallpox or other contagious agent.
5. Bioterror or dirty bombs
Comments
<strong>I
Having said that, my concerns for future attacks are:
1. Nuclear suitcase bombs
2. Suicide/homocide bombers on a large scale in the mainland US
3. Poisoning of food and/or water supply
4. Release of smallpox or other contagious agent.
5. Bioterror or dirty bombs</strong><hr></blockquote>
1/ no (US is perhaps the only countrie able to make very small nuclear bomb)
2) they 'll try but it will be very difficult : many people are watching them
3) & 4) I think it's the biggest problem : they'll try for sure
5) what is the difference with 3) or 4).
Bul like you said , there are under watch all around the world. They'll try, but it will be very very difficult for them to achieve their goal.
<strong>
5) what is the difference with 3) or 4).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
DIrty bombs are bombs where nuclear material is spread by conventional bombs making large areas uninhabitable due to radiation. A bomb detonated in Wall Street could probably cost more lifes and be worse for the economy than 911.
<strong>In some ways I feel more secure than I did. I think our government may now be doing things to prevent terror that we would say are "quasi-legal". This includes reading email and listening to phone conversations, etc on a wide spread scale using the Echelon (sp?) system.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Trouble is, this kind of monitoring was going on long before September 11, and it did very little good in the end.
[quote]<strong>I think that there may have been a determination made at the highest levels to prevent another attack at ALL costs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You're right, but how much will actually be done at a basic level? Will the brass now pay attention when some FBI underling spending all day at his desk suggests they should be checking out flight school students?
There's also a matter of how far the government is willing to go. The CIA had its hands tied a few years ago after a very public series of events, and the right to pay "dubious" characters for information was taken away from them. The CIA (if we can believe them) still cites this as a major reason for their failings regarding September 11.
[quote]<strong>These costs, in my estimation only, might include the above, as well as the public measures being taken with baggage screening, increased security, etc, and tactics such as covert law enforcement and military operations that we never hear about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unfortunately, airports across the country seem to have returned to their old methods. The increased security and screening has all but disappeared. We crave convenience, and the airlines are providing.
<strong>
DIrty bombs are bombs where nuclear material is spread by conventional bombs making large areas uninhabitable due to radiation. A bomb detonated in Wall Street could probably cost more lifes and be worse for the economy than 911.</strong><hr></blockquote>
thanks for you answer(s)
even if it is mostly for that purpose the warnings still scare the hell out of me. I really think something is gonna happen between now and September 11, 2002. Do you think they'll pick a big american day like July 4 or Memorial Day or do you think they'll go with a nothing day like 9/11 again?
<strong>I think this is really the status quo; we have to deal with threat on these terms probably for the reat of our lives. I do think there are political motivations behind this new "scare" but I think people were getting complacent anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly, we are back to the old ways (with a few minor changes) in bickering and complacency. "Business as usual". Whenever we reach this state I start to feel vulnerable. In Israel the people have been ingrained with paranoia and have no blinders on whatsoever. They live with terrorism everyday and have adapted to it. By carrying cell phones to contact authorities (or loved ones) whenever something they see is suspicious or if they are in harms way. And they watch everything. Their airport (El Al?) is the most secure airport in the world and our's should be exactly the same in every way.
Here? We go about thinking the Government/Authorities will handle everything and watch TV. We have to be more aware now than ever.
<strong>I'm more worried about our Knee Jerk Gov. Who should we really fear some Terrorist or our Gov who would trample our rights chasing petty thugs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
"petty thugs"? You have to be kidding me you stupid ****ing moron asshole. Tell the tens of thousands of people that lost loved ones on 9-11 that the people who did it were "petty tugs" not worth chasing down.
God help us. Many have already forgotten.
<strong>
"petty thugs"? You have to be kidding me you stupid ****ing moron asshole. Tell the tens of thousands of people that lost loved ones on 9-11 that the people who did it were "petty tugs" not worth chasing down.
God help us. Many have already forgotten.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Really, flying fully fueled jetliners into buildings is not the same as robbing a 7-11 in Alabama. But as I said...some are blinded. Wake the **** up.
The acts of 9|11 have taken some freedoms away so that we can preserve the ones we hold dear. I'm all for this now. The world changed on 9|11 in America. If you don't perceive this you are misguided. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
that's the problem with our society today..instant gratification and the short attention span, unfortunately.
I hope that our Government does indeed chase these "thugs" as whateverhisname said..though I think thugs is too light of a term and AI censors what I really think about those scumbags.
"petty thugs"? You have to be kidding me you stupid ****ing moron asshole. Tell the tens of thousands of people that lost loved ones on 9-11 that the people who did it were "petty tugs" not worth chasing down.
God help us. Many have already forgotten.
[quote]Originally posted by Artman @_@:
<strong>
Really, flying fully fueled jetliners into buildings is not the same as robbing a 7-11 in Alabama. But as I said...some are blinded. Wake the **** up.
The acts of 9|11 have taken some freedoms away so that we can preserve the ones we hold dear. I'm all for this now. The world changed on 9|11 in America. If you don't perceive this you are misguided. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think 'petty thugs' refers to those people who engage in acts of mass murder & terrorism, but indicates an unease about the broad brush approach U,S and International governments are taking in dealing with those they find undesirable.
Without wanting to diminish the events of 9/11 in any way, if we allow our leaders to do anything they want without scrutiny in the name of a 'War on Terror' we do a diservice to all of those who died believing that they were living and working in and for a free country.
BTW: Has the world changed ? Has the U.S changed? Im curious... the world doesn't seem to have, not here at least. I think we have had reason to doubt our safety for some time...perhaps thats the difference. Is there something new in the realisation that the US is vulnerable too?
[quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:
<strong>I don't think 'petty thugs' refers to those people who engage in acts of mass murder & terrorism, but indicates an unease about the broad brush approach U,S and International governments are taking in dealing with those they find undesirable. </strong><hr></blockquote>
1) Please define the "broad brush approach U,S and International governments are taking". Doesn't seem that broad to me. Rather it seems like your knee jerk reaction to criticize a politician you don't like.
2) Which people, beyond murderous terrorist and the dictators that protect them (don't tell me you love the Taliban?) have been classified as "undesirable".
[quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:
<strong>Without wanting to diminish the events of 9/11 in any way, if we allow our leaders to do anything they want</strong><hr></blockquote>
How exactly did they "do anything they want". Doesn't seem like they have at all.
[quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:
<strong>without scrutiny in the name of a 'War on Terror' we do a diservice to all of those who died believing that they were living and working in and for a free country.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. Last time I checked the system is working just fine. Congress had public hearings on the law that Bush wanted. He didn't get them all and many others are limited in time. Rather alarmist of you don't you think? Got your facts rather mixed up huh?
[quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:
<strong>BTW: Has the world changed ? Has the U.S changed? Im curious... the world doesn't seem to have, not here at least. I think we have had reason to doubt our safety for some time...perhaps thats the difference. Is there something new in the realisation that the US is vulnerable too?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The US has to some degree. Other parts of the world touched by Islamic terrorist have like Russia, India and Israel. We pull closer together.
The rest of the world just goes on like it always has, hating the US and wanting the Jews dead, France, ?Palestine?, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab/Muslim world.
[ 05-19-2002: Message edited by: scott_h_phd ]</p>
1. George Bush said..'You're either with us or against us', sounds pretty braod brush to me. The world can't be so easily divided into them and us. There are shades of grey. Very difficult in the circumstances I know but who said running the worlds greatest power was gonna be easy?
2) Which people, beyond murderous terrorist and the dictators that protect them (don't tell me you love the Taliban?) have been classified as "undesirable."
No I don't love the Taliban, I am sure that I would have suffered severely under their regime. However, when did the Taliban become equivalent to the terrorist group that attacked the US?
The US trained and supported the Taliban (and Al Quaida for that matter) when it suited their purpose (Anti Communism) and were negotiating with them for the handover of the terrorists in the aftermath of 9/11. As the coalition forces have been in Afghanistan for several months without capturing the leaders they demanded or finishing off the terrorists shouldn't we consider that the Taliban were unable to comply with what was asked of them?
Do you really equate the actions of mainly ignorant men, with no say in the actions of their leaders who defended their homes from attack (The Taliban soldiers), with those of the murderers who trained and lied and plotted for months or years to attack the US?
As for the others.. well you're there Im not but in the UK we have had reports of people being arrested and detained without charge. The cases that have been highlighted seem unfair. I know that they are not representational of the whole system but where a system fails it deserves to be criticised.
"How exactly did they "do anything they want". Doesn't seem like they have at all.
Last time I checked the system is working just fine. Congress had public hearings on the law that Bush wanted. He didn't get them all and many others are limited in time. Rather alarmist of you don't you think? Got your facts rather mixed up huh?"
The Government is able to do what it wants when it becomes unaceptable to hold an alternative view. The fact that the US Govt has within it people who have differences of opinion doesn't really matter if the general trend is all in the same direction and there is no check from the public on their actions. I accept that many in the US will feel so outraged that the Govt could go a lot further. That doesn't make it right.
"The US has to some degree. Other parts of the world touched by Islamic terrorist have like Russia, India and Israel. We pull closer together."
So I take it that we now approve of the Russian treatment of the Chechins?
The small group you mention demonstrates the point. The world hasn't changed. Terrorism isn't only terrorism when it affects interests with which you agree. Anyone remember Central America or Northern Ireland? Remember that arch terrorist Nelson Mandela? When Americans fought for their independance Im sure the acted in ways commensurate with our view of terrorism. In scale and in the choice of victim this incident was unusual but many people in many places suffer from terrorist acts year in year out.
"The rest of the world just goes on like it always has, hating the US and wanting the Jews dead, France, ?Palestine?, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab/Muslim world."
Mmmm..
Criticism = Hate,
Critcism of Israel = Genocide,
All Arabs and Muslims are the same.
Well made points.
Actually I dont hate the US, I admire the nations strength, resiliance, innovation and industriousness. Its just that a little honesty (Like ..we do what we do because its right for us and because we can) wouldn't go amiss rather than telling the rest of the world that its action are for justice... a moral crusade I believe the president said.
Perhaps whilst he's being so moral he'll give the Saudi's back their money, stop interfering in the internal affairs of other countries with disasterous results (Al Quaida and Sadaam Hussain amongst others all backed by US money or advisors)
BTW.. you bother because you can't believe the audacity of people who express views that do not coincide with your own.
<a href="http://theopinion.com/engine/article.asp?id=1164"; target="_blank">http://theopinion.com/engine/article.asp?id=1164</a>;
If anyone has any better suggestions, lets hear them.
Maybe if America adopted an approach, or similar, to that suggested by Len Hart in this article, we could finally do something concrete and longterm against terrorists instead of the wholesale support we lend to them by our bloated oil addictions...not to mention the fact that in the not too distant future, oil will be too scarce/difficult to extract and hence too expensive for use as a principle source of energy. Probably the fact that we have a bunch of corrupt oilmen at the helm that nothing will change and we continue in our wholesale second-hand support of terror regimes.
Regarding the recent warnings:
The CIA/NSA and intelligence networks can say what the hell they want, whenever they want, regardless of whether there's a legitimate threat or not. There is no way for the American people to know the truth or otherwise, concerning such pronouncements, and with all the secrecy and closed style of government that is becoming more the norm, verification will be all but impossible. This administration feels that the people (who's that?) are not qualified to be informed? This last set of rumors conveniently coincided with the growing scandal concerning possible gross negligence on the part of....(fill in the blanks).
[quote]"a lie can get half way around the world before the truth has put it's boots on".<hr></blockquote>
Now consider this. What would the Middle East be like if they lost their biggest source of income? What would all those people do for a living? How would they feed their people? They have a volatile society that can only be supported by oil revenue and I'm to believe that the "smart" thing to do is to cut them off?
Rather I think that because the Bush admin didn't move that way the nay sayers are convinced that it was a mistake. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 05-20-2002: Message edited by: scott_h_phd ]</p>
sam... i know yer sum kinda superhippy 'er sumpthin' but uh, like it or not, oil is the status quo and energy of choice and it's gonna be that way fer a long long time. it sucks, but there ya go.. and driving a oil-slinging boat into a fine sailing vessle ain't gonna stop it or nuclear energy(which by the way, might just save us from big oil). truth is sam...nothing can stop it. it took a 100 years to make us so dependent on oil, it'll take at least that long to undo it.
cuss
1) US and the rest of the world go oil free by new power source that cost as much but is cleaner and better.
2) Middle East has no more oil income. Millions out of work. No income. Poverty abounds. Welfare state collapse. Triple digit unemployment.
What do you think will happen? Shinny happy world free of foreign oil? Or something worse than what we have now?
oh, you mean the water engine!
nevermind,
cuss