Some of these people they interview on TV seem to think "IT" can't happen here again because of all of the "stepped up" security, awareness and such......got news for you all.....it can and will happen again unless these freaks are dealt with and that right quick! :doh:

It seems impossible to put a genie back in it's bottle......it will definately happen here again.....might not initially be by an Islamist terrorism group, but it will happen here again.

All groups with political agendas can now see terrorism as a final weapon to getting their way if they feel they are loosing their cause......Christian Foundamentalist bombings of abortion clinics = terrorism.

Maybe we should start nuking churches that are known to associate with extreme christian groups now then?

Everyone wants to nuke the middle east, so why not nuke here at home?

Just start another superfund after.

:rotf3:

Can test that new bunker busting nuke on some of those crazy non-drinking baptist churches in maine!

Cuz yanno, old growth oak is like concrete and all.

I work on the periphery of the international security business. BigFish is absolutely correct in his assessment that it will happen here again. It may not be a plane or a train or a bus but the extremist will use whatever means thay can to strike terror into the American public.
Of couse, Nuking a Middle East country will not solve the problem. leaving Iraq will not either. What the hell, we weren't there on 9/11 were we?
No, the answer is a lot more complex and, trust me, I'm not bright enough to know what it is.
I know I fought for my country in a foreign land back in the 60's and it burns me to see what is happening here and around the world. We are now relegated to these "Alerts" so we can be more vigilant.
I just feel that if we are going to wage war, then by God, let's do it!!! :bounce:

I just feel that if we are going to wage war, then by God, let's do it!!! Yep....has always been the downfall of the US since the days of WWI.

Why is it that the US is the (or at least was the first) only country in history to not TAKE OVER a country once we beat them in war? Doesn't that kind of make the whole purpose of the war in the first place irrelevant? What's the point in beating up your sworn enemy (AFTER THEY PUNCHED YOU FIRST) and then just going home and letting them attack you again tomorrow?

Never mind take over....we are rebuilding their friggin country at our expense!!!!!! :mad:

Army giving 5 more billion to Halliburton to do jobs the Army should be doing.

Surprise? Nah, none here.

Same s**t, different war....... :mad:

We should not be doing anything!!!!!! We completed our mission when we removed Saddam from power.....no WMD's....our bad but then it turned into a "lets rebuild Iraq and put our own system in place to run the country and that way everyone will forget that the real reason we were there was to find the WMD's"! We are paying the freight for cryin' out loud......why? Gas prices are at an all time high and we...the American public are getting royally screwed!!!!! This country is in dire need of some reform let me tell you....and you think an uprising can't happen here? We need some change here! :mad:

I agree BF.....but one question....no WMD's Why is it that EVERYBODY forgets the REALITY that WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT SADDAM HAD WMD......HE USED THEM TO KILL OVER 200,000 SUNNIS AND KURDS. This is undisputable and part of the public record.

We may not have found WMD in Iraq, but we know they have the technology to build them (mostly biological) at any time they liked. I guess the question is: do we attack after the weapons are made, or before they are made? These are not stock-pile type weapons. They can be made easily at any time.

BTW - it ALSO pisses me off to no end that the American people (or more accurately our pocket-books) are being used to subsidize the entire world. Yet we have no jobs here, and many people struggling to make ends meet in the USA..... :realmad: :realmad:

We didn't find any technology either.

Its a known fact the weapons they used in Iran were given to them (by us in part... the VX was traced to a chemical company in the US) but how much "technology" they got is a whole other question.

Its all retarded if you ask me.

Its all retarded if you ask me. Yep

Those deaths, if I am not mistaken, happened before Iraq invaded Kuwait? Not after the rules were set in place to prohibit Iraq from having them. I believe they are still there somewhere! Saddam needed removing and that reason for going into Iraq is good enough for me but we should have packed it up and left that %$%$%$%$te-hole to itself after we got the head honcho.......I believe we are only there now to police the region until Bin Laden is apprehended....they are just trying to limit his options for hiding.

I agree BF.....but one question.... Why is it that EVERYBODY forgets the REALITY that WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT SADDAM HAD WMD......HE USED THEM TO KILL OVER 200,000 SUNNIS AND KURDS. This is undisputable and part of the public record.
The key word is HAD.

The administration said as fact they knew Saddam had stockpiles. Rummy even went so far as to say he knew where they were. The reality is we nothing to justify these claims aside from some unaccounted for stocks that hadn't been destroyed by the time the inspectors left. WMD that had a short shelf life anyway...

The important point is that we've set the bar so low for justification we couldn't ever repeat it and out credibility is seriously damaged.

Why is this important?

Our credibility and moral high ground give us the freedom to address the real threats without the same resistance. In other words, it's impacted our ability to keep it from happening again.

-spence

This country, as well as almost all others in history, have never just packed up and gone home after a war. the only time we didn't do it was when we lost, i.e. Vietnam. We still have troops in Germany and Japan over 50 years after we defeated them. So would anyone in their right mind suspect that Iraq would be different? Leaving a country after you have defeated them is simply a receipe for another war in a decade or so.

We did not have troops in all of Germany...just part of it after the split! Point is we were not there rebuilding it or trying to govern it! :rtfm:

If it happened in Britain, of course it could happen here.

Britain's intelligence services are the equal of anyone's.

They don't have a written constitution with a Bill of Rights. There's no 4th Amendment in the UK, and their courts don't have an exclusionary rule that prohibits the introduction of illegally obtained evidence.

Their intelligence and law enforcement people aren't hamstrung by their laws, and they have much more leeway to conduct wiretaps, other electronic surveillance and warrantless searches of premises.

Almost 35 years of IRA terrorism has given their law enforcement people a lot of experience, and their laws allow the authorities to detain terrorist suspects without bringing charges, sometimes "At Her Majesty's Pleasure", which means they throw away the key.

Their miltary special operations folks are the gold standard world-wide and they can be employed domestically. And have been reputed to have been used as hit squads against the IRA and INLF.

And, you have to believe that whatever intelligence the US has gleaned against Al Queda and its friends since 9/11 has been shared with the Brits.

We did not have troops in all of Germany...just part of it after the split! Point is we were not there rebuilding it or trying to govern it! :rtfm:

Ever here of the uhh, err, Marshall PLan? Technically, "WE" only had troops in 1/4th of Germany, France, the UK, and the Sovs split up the rest plus a 4 way split of Berlin (who here has taken the Berlin Night Train :hee: :wavey: ). The ideological difference of the Soviets brought the Iron Curtain and resulted in the Berlin Airlift.

We did rebuild Germany and Japan and we, or at least our parents and grandparents and Capesams :laughs: , paid a goodly portion of it. We instituted the governments there and got them started too. But the German people and the Japanese people pulled themselves together and made something of their countries with PRIDE. But they were fully defeated militarily but fortunately did not have much in the way of roving hit squads and suicide bombers.

BTW - it ALSO pisses me off to no end that the American people (or more accurately our pocket-books) are being used to subsidize the entire world. Yet we have no jobs here, and many people struggling to make ends meet in the USA..... :realmad: :realmad:
right on....homerun04
if you think about the money being spent daily on the war on drugs....the war in Iraq, afghanistan, and every where else we're having to play world cop,,,,, and what that money could do for us Americans as part of their states budget...it's mind boggling. Easily we could give each state in america a 2 billion dollar + boost if were were not engaged in all these endeavors. Those huge BLACK triangular area 51 aircraft seen by thousands of Americans floating over head with no sound what so ever,,,,are the secret aircraft of Armegeden.... and i have no doubt that we shall prevail....but we dont want to do it pre-emptively which is feared to be looked at historically as a non American type of approach based on principle
and will probably only be used in retalliation.

Ever here of the uhh, err, Marshall PLan? Technically, "WE" only had troops in 1/4th of Germany, France, the UK, and the Sovs split up the rest plus a 4 way split of Berlin (who here has taken the Berlin Night Train :hee: :wavey: ). The ideological difference of the Soviets brought the Iron Curtain and resulted in the Berlin Airlift.

We did rebuild Germany and Japan and we, or at least our parents and grandparents and Capesams :laughs: , paid a goodly portion of it. We instituted the governments there and got them started too. But the German people and the Japanese people pulled themselves together and made something of their countries with PRIDE. But they were fully defeated militarily but fortunately did not have much in the way of roving hit squads and suicide bombers.


thank you john....

just last week a "master of all he surveys" was proclaiming the injustices of Gitmo and I laughed about Amnesty's comment that it was the "Gulag" of our time.

Then I mentioned that 8 or so congressman went down to review the "atrocities" (a cross section of parties mind you) and we have heard nary peep from the press since.

I think when they saw the air conditioning many of the leftists shut up.

how soon people forgot about 9/11 and Madrid and began criticising again....

We still have troops in Germany and Japan over 50 years after we defeated them.

Stop with the "we still have troops in X" because neither of those places would fall apart like Iraq would today, tomorrow, or a year from now if we pulled out.

Those are normal overseas bases, not "occupation forces".

that the enemy is as terrified of democracy as we are of terrorism.

Then I mentioned that 8 or so congressman went down to review the "atrocities" (a cross section of parties mind you) and we have heard nary peep from the press since.
I wouldn't say that's true at all. Tell me there hasn't been plenty of reporting on GITMO since???
I think when they saw the air conditioning many of the leftists shut up.
Do you have to be a leftist to be critical of GITMO? Don't think so, in fact it's an observation any pragmatic person can make regardless of idiology.
how soon people forgot about 9/11 and Madrid and began criticising again....
I love how it always comes back to the "remember 9/11" mantra. Does 9/11 weaken the US Constitution? Does it give us freedom to ignore our own laws?

If the Founding Fathers were aware the US Government was secretly detaining large numbers of people without charge they would be rolling in their graves.

We're not talking about the specific interrogation of known terrorists, it's the wholesale rounding up of anyone we choose, then putting them through hell to see if they just might know anything...

I think most Americans find the interrogation techniques permitted and at times endorsed by the Administration to be quite un-American and patently dehumanizing, often abusive and sometimes even torture.

This isn't my America, and if 9/11 made it so, then you have just given Bin Laden another victory.

-spence

Soence - I agree with some of your points, and disagree with some others.

I guess that's what makes the world go round.............. :)

Stop with the "we still have troops in X" because neither of those places would fall apart like Iraq would today, tomorrow, or a year from now if we pulled out.

Those are normal overseas bases, not "occupation forces".

But there is no question that they started out as "occupation forces" and the situation in Japan and Germany right after WWII was much the same as it is in Iraq today. Yes, including "insurgents" then referred to as die hards who were still fighting the allied troops well after their goverments had surrendered. Many parts of south pacific weren't "pacified" until several years after the war ended. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Spence,

re:"I love how it always comes back to the "remember 9/11" mantra. Does 9/11 weaken the US Constitution? Does it give us freedom to ignore our own laws?

If the Founding Fathers were aware the US Government was secretly detaining large numbers of people without charge they would be rolling in their graves. "

I doubt that. The U.S. consitution does not apply outside the U.S.,, neither do most U.S. laws. Do you think we just tried spies during our other wars when they were caught outside the U.S.? We did, and still do, treat POWs according to the Geneva conventions. But the guys at Gitmo don't qualify for POW status, as they were never in a recognized army to start with. IMHO thay are treating the majority of those guys waaay better than they deserve.

Spence,
I doubt that. The U.S. consitution does not apply outside the U.S.,, neither do most U.S. laws. Do you think we just tried spies during our other wars when they were caught outside the U.S.? We did, and still do, treat POWs according to the Geneva conventions. But the guys at Gitmo don't qualify for POW status, as they were never in a recognized army to start with. IMHO thay are treating the majority of those guys waaay better than they deserve.
The US has agreed to International law which many believe we are clearly violating. The Constitution may not dictate International law, but that doesn't mean the Founding Fathers didn't write plenty about how they felt the US should act Globally.

Just because a prisoner isn't a POW doesn't mean there are no rules. If we believe in the Rule of Law then we should establish guidelines for treatment of suspected terrorist prisoners so it's clear we are within bounds. One of the major political failures of GITMO is that it sends the message we are above all law.

-spence

The US has agreed to International law which many believe we are clearly violating. The Constitution may not dictate International law, but that doesn't mean the Founding Fathers didn't write plenty about how they felt the US should act Globally.

Just because a prisoner isn't a POW doesn't mean there are no rules. If we believe in the Rule of Law then we should establish guidelines for treatment of suspected terrorist prisoners so it's clear we are within bounds. One of the major political failures of GITMO is that it sends the message we are above all law.

-spence

Name the "International law" that many believe we are violating. there are no rules governing non-POWs. There are no laws, international or otherwise that govern how a soverign nation can treat detainess outside their own country who are not POWs. We are a nation of laws, that is we have laws that govern our actions within the country. Outside the country there are a few international treaties, but other than that, anything goes. That's why we have wars! There aren't and should not be any bounds on how we treat captives who are intent of harming innocent civilians. IMHO anything is fair game. How do you think the spy game is/was played, especially during the cold war? Do you think we fed enemy spies cookies to get the information we wanted out of them?

I know its difficult for epople, who are used to have laws or rules govern every aspect of their lives, but once you step outside the country and engange in hostile acts against a soverign nation, there are no rules. You may wish it otherwise, but that't the way it is and has always been.

ok spence, I set myself up for that...

I haven't heard much reporting on "ATROCITIES" at Gitmo since the reports of their return and their subsequent reports....


do you have anything current that I have missed ?

i hope so.....


The right and the left are usually poorly informed, IMO, and that has a huge impact on their rhetoric.

I am addressing many issues mentioned here bear with me.

We did rebuild Germany and they paid every cent we told them it cost. They are the only country to do so. We took over Japan and instituted our form of democracy there. That was their payback. If Haliburton wasn't submitting the lowest contract bids some other company would be with "ties" to one of our current leaders.
As far as WMD's, nope no one found any amount that could be considered a stockpile. Did he have and use them in the past, just ask the KURDS. Did Saddam and his henchmen kill 300,000 non believers, just ask their families who have been digging their bodies up. And Saddam showed so much arrogance in those peoples murders he left their identification with thier bodies. 300,000 is all they have founbd so far because things are a little hot out in the desert in Iraq right now, so no looking is going on.
Why are we the only country that is supposed to be blessed with free speech and a democratic way of life? In this regard we are extremely selfish. Sure we give money, we give many things and now we are giving are most precious children to this cause. I am not referring to one person here on this
list when I say this but many people are starting to sound like Jane Fonda out there, and most of them are doing and saying things only because they want to unseat George Bush. These Fondas, certain senators and congressman,
do not really care about our servicemen and women they just want to get a democrat in the high office, which makes thier intentions rather obscene.
To say that we shouldn't be there is to say that their isn't an Iraqi worth saving. You can't always bandaid problems overseas with foreign aid and hope thing will get better. Sometimes you have to gut it up and do the right thing and sometimes that hurts.

This is also a VERY different situation Mike, occupying and just sitting on the country is NOT working this time around.

Just because it worked before dosen't mean it'll work again.
Maybe you're forgetting the ENORMOUS DEBT that we're accruing from all this?

Whats it all worth? Honestly.

Name the "International law" that many believe we are violating. there are no rules governing non-POWs. There are no laws, international or otherwise that govern how a soverign nation can treat detainess outside their own country who are not POWs.
That's simply not true. The Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions detail treament of prisoners who don't have POW status. The US Army's field manual even recognizes protections for non-POW's "engaged in hostile or belligerent conduct."

Perhaps even more significant was the recent US Supreme court ruling that "United States courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at Guantánamo Bay."

-spence

ok spence, I set myself up for that...

I haven't heard much reporting on "ATROCITIES" at Gitmo since the reports of their return and their subsequent reports....
Wasn't that like 2 weeks ago?

-spence

I will never forget the day i was having breakfast and read that bush and CO refused to re-sign the treaty that held american forces liable for international war crimes. I think he was in office for about 1 month. 9/11 hadn't happened yet and when i read that i knew we were going to go to war. I had a hunch it was going to be Iran.
Bush has spent about 90% of his energy on fixing other nations policies and about 10% on our own.. I really dont agree with that..

janefonda was great in barberella IMO

Im staying out of this one.
:bounce:

Im staying out of this one.
:bounce:

Me too....Im just enjoying some of the bonehead comments im seeing from the well known lefties on here. Its quite funny yet so sad in many ways :rollem:

Me too....Im just enjoying some of the bonehead comments im seeing from the well known lefties on here. Its quite funny yet so sad in many ways :rollem:

dont worry. i've heard some real classics from you too :bshake:

That's simply not true. The Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions detail treament of prisoners who don't have POW status. The US Army's field manual even recognizes protections for non-POW's "engaged in hostile or belligerent conduct."

Perhaps even more significant was the recent US Supreme court ruling that "United States courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at Guantánamo Bay."

-spence

O.K., I'm going to have to look up those two treaties. The U.S. army field manual is just that, a manual, no force of law and can be changed at the pentagon's whim. As far as the court rulings go, notice that they didn't say that the Consitution applied, only that the detainees needed to have some sort of hearing. In fact that decision proves my point about the consitution not applying outside the U.S. Do you think the courts would allow a hearing before a military tribunal to pass for justice, inside the U.S. ?

boy it wouls really suck if you were innocent wouldnt it??? :yak:

janefonda was great in barberella IMO :rotf3: Eben is the man....always get's us all back on track in our threads.

Where does "common sense" play into this arguement? Geneva Convention or not....who cares? Here are the FACTS:

1. These terrorrists (radical Islamists, Muslins, and Al-Quaeda) are NOT a recognized nation. They come from many countries, and only share one thing in common -- their radical interpretation of their religion makes them beleive the West are the evil infidels, and they beleive they have a moral obligation to kill all Westerners.
2. They are training an Army of people every day to kill Americans.
3. They have declared war on America -- many, many times.
4. They have attacked America a number of times (embassies, 9/11, cruise ships - Achillie Lauro (sp?), etc).
5. They have killed thousands of Americans.
6. They will not stop until either they are all dead or we are all dead - IN THEIR OWN WORDS.

So, wouldn't common sense dictate that we do whatever we can to win this war now, and debate the "philosophies" of what we did after the war? If we do it the other way around, we might not be alive later on to have any discussions. I never understood the Geneva Convention -- or any conventions that try to put "rules" around wars. In reality who in their right minds would care about "good decurum" when they are about to be killed and wiped off the face of the earth? If you knew you where about to be killed, would you not prevent it because you thought you might be violating some convention?

Frankly, war is hell -- and IMO there are no rules in hell. Those of us looking to apply "rules" and "good behavior" during war time are destined to loose in war. IMO, we should be as brutal to them as they are to us. And once we eradicate them, then we can go back to being "nicey-nice". As for our Founding Father's, they rounded up many Torries on a regular basis without cause. The key to victory is not in defeating your enemy but it is in defeating your enemy's strategy (Tsun Tsu - The Art of War).

Sure, some might say that acting as brutal as them would make us as evil as they are, but I disagree. And here is the difference: We at least have the decency to go back to being civilized people after war, and act like barbarians only during war time. These terrorist people would still be looking for the next group of people to kill.

I sometimes think the people who are looking to treat everyone "fairly" are making the mistake of projecting our values onto everyone else -- so I ask, would they treat our prisoners according to the Geneva Convention? I don't think so. And as for me, I will always side with the men and women who have died -- and are fighting today -- for my freedom and the freedom, protection and safety of my children. Let's stop hamstringing our military - let them do their job. It would be done quicker, and ultimately a lot less lives would be lost on both sides of the ledger.

Do I wish we lived in a world where everyone obeyed International Laws and acted according to generally accepted rules of decency? Sure I do. But unfortunately we don't.

i do not support OBL's views, I'm just repeating what I read:

HR: I've read OBL's open letter to the US a half dozen times.
In it he says he wants us to leave the middle east and israel to stop killing palestinians and he'll stop.

In it he also says if we do not meet his conditions he'll continue ordering attacks on the US.

But yes, it also says he thinks we're psychotic and women blahblahblahblah all his psycho religiousbabble is nuts.

So blah, like I said, it all sucks.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. So then let's do it and end it all sooner rather then later, IMO.

Then millions of innocents die because of a few.
Its all retarded.
All of it just makes me sad.

But I do especially hate one thing...

The media.

Then millions of innocents die because of a few. Anyone who would let terrorist scum live and train in their country are not "innocent" people IMO. That is something we all need to come to grips with, and in my judgement, something that no one wants to address. Iraq needs to get their borders in control and start preventing terrorists from entering their country. If they can't do this, then they are going to pay the price of American bombs. Nothing would make the US happier then to have secure borders around every Middle East country so this way we can start holding the governments of these countries responsible for the actions of their citizens.

Think of the pshychology....if you were an Iraqi living in Iraq your entire life, and you were oppressed your entire life, and if you hated your government all these years, and then the USA comes in and frees you -- wouldn't you use the very first opportunity you had to get the HELL OUT OF THERE.

Why aren't more people leaving Iraq now that it is free? IMO it is because while most Iraqis detested Saddam they still think the West are evil infidels. So are they innocent? I don't know.

its just so unfortunate that our world has come to all this...my heart and prayers go out to all those in london.

its just so unfortunate that our world has come to all this...I think - for me - a better word then "unfortunate" is "shame" -- because we, as a species, made CONSCIENCE decisions to make this world the way it is. "Unfortunate" (to me) by definition implies a certain amount of luck, or randomness, or "fortune".

Our world is f****d up by design because governmental egos made it so -- and that is a shame. Why don't our governments do what they are supposed to do and make this world a better place?

But then again, one man's (or government's) definition of better, and another man's (or government's) definition of better can be radically different (e.g. Mr. Bush vs. Mr. Heussein).

Why don't our governments do what they are supposed to do and make this world a better place?



Profits.... its all about profits. :rtfm:

Profits.... its all about profits. :( :(

and if anyone doesnt believe me, look into what bush thinks about global warming and the G-8 convention. Profits win over saving our planets sensitive ecosystems. :( :yak:

Profits.... its all about profits. So, in your opinion, is Capitalism ultimately evil because it makes us change our priorities so that we eventually all become money-centric?

ummm capatilism is money-centric.

Is it evil??? that all depends who is making the money :devil:

Heres the bottom line.....These Muslim extremists are cold blooded murders and we must wipe them all out somehow. Given the chance they would gladly come into my house and yours and take a knife to you and your kids throats and not feel any remorse as they watch you die. We;ve seen this first hand and its %$%$%$%$ing sick. this is what we are dealing with here. We CANNOT talk to these people and work something out, pulling out of Iraq and the entire middle east will not stop anything. They want us ALL dead. Why some of you people dont get this is beyond me. And why you dont want to do anything about these people is even more sickening. Oh just do what OBL wants and he will leave us alone....Not a friggen chance idiots. These are the Nazis of this time. Thats the best way to put it.They ALL must be killed and thats final. If you want to sit back and try and make excuses for why they hate us go right ahead.....you CANNOT justify what these %$%$%$%$ers are doing to us and the good people of London and Spain and elsewere. Some of you people have more hatred for W than you do for the terrosits who will come into your house and slice your childs throat. Wake up people and get a friggen clue as to what kind of people we are dealing with here.

Who you gonna kill there Skippy...1.2 Billion People?

It's a bit more complicated that that :rtfm:

-spence

Then millions of innocents die because of a few.
Its all retarded.
All of it just makes me sad.

But I do especially hate one thing...

The media.


:yak4: :yak4: :yak4: yep :mad:


and you are correct as well spence. come on now skippy, a.k.a. adolf give us a break :whackin:

back to the original thread. it can happen here with the large populace of muslims in detroit and brooklynn there may be a few with terrorist ties.
i beleive that a terrorist is a someone who targets innocent civilian populations and inflicts death and destruction on such to promote their cause. anyone who does so should be identified and destroyed no questions asked. this should be done to benifit ALL of mankind ALL over the world.

back to the original thread. it can happen here with the large populace of muslims in detroit and brooklynn there may be a few with terrorist ties.
i beleive that a terrorist is a someone who targets innocent civilian populations and inflicts death and destruction on such to promote their cause. anyone who does so should be identified and destroyed no questions asked. this should be done to benifit ALL of mankind ALL over the world.


like. oh wow dude :uhoh:


that's so heavy..... :rotf3: :rotf3: :rotf3:


wake up and live... it's a dangerous world... it can happen here but maybe it will happen there ? I don't know. I like that.... "I don't know"....

but I am not saying your wrong afterhours

just goofing on the severity of the statement....

oooooohhh eeexcuuuseee me bw, did'nt mean to insult your intellect. just stating my thoughts as simple as they may be. bet you don't know a lot- no i'm wrong you know it all.

nice response there afterhours keep up the personal attacks


where did everyones sense of humor go ?

this issue is SO serious. OMG I am SO angry. I want SO to kill some terrorists

I hate them SO much, like :gf:

you should talk.

some examples please ?

Hey...I am going to a cookout this afternoon and fishing all night long! :bounce: :btu:

sure- most recent - this post

i seem to remember your "stupid pu--ies comment"

i'm done with you.

stupib p***ssies doesn't sound to "personal" to me.

after you walk see if you can understand that you are avoiding substantiating things because you are wrong.

I have made plenty of personal attacks in my life but NONE were against you

please grow up :rotf3:

Prudence and common sense dictate that it will happen here again, as well as tells us that most difinately there are terrorist cells already here in the US. As long as we have an open border, there will be no way of preventing this from happening here again.

We (USA) is holding on to a vision of the kind of country we want to be (e.g. open borders, freedom for all), but the terrorists are making that vision unrealistic. As long as there is an organized terrorists threat against the USA we will need to alter our vision of who we are as a country. Once the organized threat is eliminated, then we can go back to being the "open border" and "freedom for all" kind of country we want to be.

During war time things change. Eminent domain, for example. Did you know that during war time the US Government (Millitary) has the right to take any personal property they need, as well as mandate any company in the US to stop doing what they are doing and begin manufacturing goods for the US Military? Where are all the ACLU people complaining about that? It happened extensively during WWII.

The differnce is in the US and UK our defense contractors are actually private firms. I can share stories with you about the US Gov't funnelling money to these firms during peace times in an effort to make sure they stay viable for war time. Ever heard of phantom projects? But the Governemtn doesn't have top only rely on these firms -- they can force ANY company to begin production on behalf of the US Military.

My point is simply that during war time, the rules change. Can it happen here again? Not only can it, but there is NO WAY IT CAN'T. I am surprised we haven't had a number of "copycat" bombings by some of our "native-grown" lunatics already -- and I am NOT referring to Native Americans. The ginie is out of the bottle forever.......... :(

I am retracting this thread....you can all take your ball and leave my sand box now! :eek:

:bc: :bc: :bc:

:crying: :crying: :crying:


:rotf3: :rotf3: :rotf3:

Repeat after me...."america can not solve all the problems in this world"

we should focus on our own problems. like improving our roads and bridges, bettering our schools, and heaven forbid we clean up our enviromental messes.

we should focus on our own problems Huh? You mean that terrorists killing us isn't our problem....?? Why worry about the roads if we are all going to be dead if we don't address the immediate threat to our country first?

:yawn:


:rotf3: :rotf3: :rotf3:


you're absolutely right HR.

guerrila warfare. we, and others, can never let our guard down anymore.

everytime we do ? :whackin:

:hang:

Huh? You mean that terrorists killing us isn't our problem....?? Why worry about the roads if we are all going to be dead if we don't address the immediate threat to our country first?
You can make a pretty good argument that a host of domestic issues kill far more Americans every year than terrorisim ever will. Doesn't mean terror doesn't need to be addressed, but our Nation's priorities are certianly out of whack in many ways. You've said as much yourself.

-spence

You can mark this down and take it to the bank:

Before the year 2015, a nuclear device is going to be detonated somewhere in an urban area of the US, killing at minimum half a million people, either immediately or due to the after effects. I flat-out guarantee it. Sure as the sunrise.

It's inevitable. And I don't pretend to be smart enough to know how to prevent it.

The aftermath of that ain't gonna be pretty. For anyone.

If that's the case Mike (and I tend to agree) then why have we don't little to nothing to secure our borders, ports and old Soviet nukes since 9/11?

Doesn't add up.

-spence

Yes, Spence, I agree. There are many things our country should have been addressing all these years. Trust me, I am no great cheerleader of any country that is as wealthy as our's but still wont address hunger, healtcare, poverty, global warming, etc. right here in our own country. I'd be interested in your list of domestic issues that kill far more Americans every year than terrorisim ever will.

But given our limited resources don't you think that our first priority should be staying alive another day so that we can eventually address all our domestic issues someday? Doesn't our survival come first?

I guess what it comes down to is that some people in this thread actually do believe the US is at war right now, while some others don't believe we are in a war. My feeling is those who do not think we are in a war right now are playing into the hands of the terrorirsits. I believe that the radicals in the Middle East PURPOSEFULLY did not use a country to attack the USA but rather used a group of non-nationals (i.e. read terrorists) to attack us. They know that when in a "traditional" war when one country fights another country - no one will ever beat the USA. So they changed the rules on us. And I do beleive the terrorists are government sponsored. These people may be evil, but they are not dumb.

But make no mistake about it -- we ARE in a war right now. And yes, we can argue all day along about where our resources should go in order to make for a better and safer USA. All of them need to be addressed. Just in what order?

You can mark this down and take it to the bank:

Before the year 2015, a nuclear device is going to be detonated somewhere in an urban area of the US, killing at minimum half a million people, either immediately or due to the after effects. I flat-out guarantee it. Sure as the sunrise.

It's inevitable. And I don't pretend to be smart enough to know how to prevent it.

The aftermath of that ain't gonna be pretty. For anyone.


For all the security that's been upped at the Cargo docks I can't help but wonder that that device might sail right under our noses in the keel of a cruising sailboat coming in from who knows where....



It could be detonated before it even reaches a port.

the whole scenario is scarey for sure Mike... :uhoh: :uhoh:

If that's the case Mike (and I tend to agree) then why have we don't little to nothing to secure our borders, ports and old Soviet nukes since 9/11? That is EXACTLY my point Spence. We in the USA need to CHANGE our vision of what the USA is all about UNTIL we end the terrorism threat.

Once that is accomplished, then we can go back to the "open society" vision we have for the USA.

When you have a perfectly good barrel of apples, and then you let a few bad apples in to the barrel, you stop letting any more apples into the barrel until the bad apples have been expelled or eliminated -- or else eventually the whole barrel spoils.

That is EXACTLY my point Spence. We in the USA need to CHANGE our vision of what the USA is all about UNTIL we end the terrorism threat.
Exactly the wrong thing to do.

There's no reason why we can't deal with terrorisim without changing what makes America the best country in the world. The challenge is in putting aside partisan BS and electoral paranoia and working toward pragmatic and mindful solutions.

-spence

Exactly the wrong thing to do. Well then I'll remember your feelings on this the next time terrorist kill over 4,000 people in the US. As for me, I never want to look any mother in the eye AGAIN who's child has died here in the US due to a terrorist attack - and have to tell her that I think the terrorists have just as much right to be here in the USA as does anyone else -- because that is the kind of country we WANT to be.

Theory and practicality are often at odds with one another.

Long ago, someone wrote that if a nuclear bomb ever hit NYC, it wouldn't arrive on the nose of a Soviet ICBM but in the hull of a freighter. This was before dozens of large container ships arrived in Port Newark and Port Elizabeth every day of the year. Each carrying over 100 individual truck containers. Impossible to check every one before they enter the port area. Even with triple or quadruple the resources we have employed at the moment---and yes, it's a paltry and pathetic effort at present. Even screening them before they left the unloading area wouldn't be much of a deterrent. You don't have to wait for a semi to hook up to it and drive it into lower Manhattan--you set a timer to detonate it at the dock. You kill everyone in a 2 mile radius and with the right wind, you blanket Manhattan with radiation.

Same thing with other ports, like Baltimore, that have large scale containerized freight operations. How many thousands of individual containers get off loaded every day at the various ports?

Like I said---I'm not smart enough to figure it out. Hopefully, intelligence assets can sniff out such a plan, but they still only need to get lucky once.

Exactly the wrong thing to do.

There's no reason why we can't deal with terrorisim without changing what makes America the best country in the world. The challenge is in putting aside partisan BS and electoral paranoia and working toward pragmatic and mindful solutions.

-spence

no offense spence (not directed "at" you) but IMO opinion America has to STOP bragging that they are the "GREATEST" or "BEST" country in the world. That is a big reason why a lot of other countries dislike us. We are to cockey. A lot of other countries don't suck either....

If that's the case Mike (and I tend to agree) then why have we don't little to nothing to secure our borders, ports and old Soviet nukes since 9/11?

Doesn't add up.

-spence

John Bolton :hihi:

Huh? You mean that terrorists killing us isn't our problem....?? Why worry about the roads if we are all going to be dead if we don't address the immediate threat to our country first?

On average 43,000 people die in car accidents each year.
17,000 of those are drunk driving related.


Statistically, thats a bit more "immediate" than terrorism.

And also statistically, drunk drivers are more dangerous *in the US* than a terrorist.

More people in the US *alone* die because of drunk drivers than of terrorism *worldwide*.

no offense spence (not directed "at" you) but IMO opinion America has to STOP bragging that they are the "GREATEST" or "BEST" country in the world. That is a big reason why a lot of other countries dislike us. We are to cockey. A lot of other countries don't suck either....
Nothing wrong with feeling you're the best, the US is pretty unique in the World community.

The problem is a lack of humility, overt entitlement and the obvious arrogance.

-spence

On average 43,000 people die in car accidents each year. Okay, explain to me what else the government can do to prevent drunk driving...?? Or to prevent less car accidents..??

Make penalties 100x more brutal.

Take away licenses permanently.
Put people in jail for long periods of time for drunk driving.

I agree wholeheartedly likwid.....so let's do those things.

But why would doing any of those things prevent us from also fighting terrorism? In other words, the original statement made was that the USA needs to focus our resources on domestic issues that cause more deaths to our citizens then terrorism.

I don't see very many resources needed to implement your suggestions. So, let's do both - simultaneously --- fight terrorism AND fix the drunk driving issue. Seems we have the resources for both. One is NOT interdependent upon the other.

I have a low-cost, but ultimately greasy solution.

Put cooked bacon in every subway car, cargo ship, airport, and other suitable public places. Replenish as needed. Kinda like dangling some garlic to ward off vampires.

If you really want to get mean, invade all mid-east countries, then, institutite American football as the official sport. You know, pigskin? :hihi:

weewee :lasso:

weewee - you are a mess..... :rotf3:

The issue is, money can be spent fixing roads, fighting drunk driving, helping quell joblessness, the homeless and whatnot and we'd SEE the results, look at the numbers on the "war on terror". BILLIONS are being pumped out the door and out of our pockets yet what does it do for us? London wasn't "saved" by the war on terror. And there's plenty of big heads in the extremist scenes still running around and evading the US on probably a quarter of what we spend in a week to try and find them.

3 groups claiming responsibility for London, nobody is sure who did it.

They won't have to bomb the US to win, they're already doing a good job creating an ENORMOUS debt.

I agree. But again, all those things you claim we should be spending our money on, we actually ARE already spending our money on.

Seems to me your arguement lies in the AMOUNT of money you want to see spent on these other areas versus a war on terrorism.

So I will ask my final question on this thread -- what would YOU do if YOU were the President of the US, and you took a solemn oath during your Oath of Office that above all else you would protect the sovereignty of the US and safety of her citizens?

I don't equate bad roads with terrorism.....you could always choose to not drive if you think our roads put you at risk. You can't choose to not be blown to bits by a terrorist. But I do understand your desire to see your own tax dollars being spent on something for you that is more tangible for you to see results. My arguement is -- your money IS being used on something for you --- your safety and hopefully saving your life from a potential terrorist attack. Don't blame the US government for having to spend your money on preventing terrorism instead of the other things you want your money spent on -- blame the terrorists. Without them, we could be spending your money where you want it spent.

The money may be being spent on those things, but efficiently? Need we mention the 3 year project for the highway department to fix the 140 bridge in New Bedford right before 195? LOL I can't think of a single time that I went by that project that they were actually working and not just standing around looking pretty.

Honestly, I couldn't tell you what I'd do the president's shoes, I would never wanna be in that position.

And as far as choosing not to be blown to bits by terrorists? Sure you can choose not to be, because you REALLY think they're gonna blow up an area that has a couple cow farms and a lot of woods? Or howabout obscure cape beaches? :rotf3:

Back to money again since you edited, sure we can spend money on fighting terrorism, but do we need to spend it on $5 billion Halliburton contracts? And then be told that they didn't think they should tell us about it? Like I said, they don't have to bomb the US, just keep sending out propaganda, we'll keep HEMMORAGING money chasing ghosts and crap leads.

Nothing wrong with feeling you're the best, the US is pretty unique in the World community.

The problem is a lack of humility, overt entitlement and the obvious arrogance.

-spence

true spence, we are but "obvious arrogance" hit's the nail right on the head

And this would be a good poll:

Is it bad foreign policy or "blind hate"?
I'll take the former thanks.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/07/bush-admin-may-be-responsible-for.html

ABC News just reported that the British authorities say they have evidence that the London attacks last week were an operation planned by Al Qaeda for the last two years. This was an operation the Brits thought they caught and stopped in time, but they were wrong. The piece of the puzzle ABC missed is that this is an operation the Bush administration helped botch last year.

I.e., last year Bush botched the effort to thwart the London subway attacks.

1. The London bombers, per ABC, are connected to an Al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in Lahore, Pakistan.

2. Pakistani authorities recovered the laptop of a captured Al Qaeda leader, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, on July 13, 2004. On that laptop, they found plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway. According to an expert interviewed by ABC, "there is absolutely no doubt that Khan was part of a worldwide Al Qaeda operation, not just in the United States but also in Great Britain and throughout the west."

Also important, but not reported by ABC this evening, after his arrest Khan started working for our side - sending emails to his other Al Qaeda buddies, working as our mole.

3. ABC reports that names in Khan's computer matched a suspected cell of Britain's of Pakistani decent, many of who lived near the town of Luton, England. According to ABC, authorities thought they had stopped the subway plot with the arrest of more than a dozen people last year associated with Khan. Obviously, they hadn't.

4. Those arrests were the arrests that the Bush administration botched by announcing a heightened security alert the week of the Democratic Convention. The alert was raised because of information found on Khan's computer (this is in the public record already, see below). In its effort to either prove that the alert was serious, or to try and scare people during the Dem Convention, the administration gave the press too much information about WHY they raised the alert. This put the media on the trail of Khan - they found him, and they published his name.

Because the US let the cat out of the bag, the media got a hold of Khan's name and published the fact that he had been captured - his Al Qaeda contacts thus found out their "buddy" was actually a mole, and they fled. Our sole source inside Al Qaeda was destroyed. As a result, the Brits had to have a high speed chase to catch some of Khan's Al Qaeda associates as they fled, and, according to press reports, the Brits and Pakistanis both fear that some slipped away.

Again, these were guys involved with the plot to blow up the London subway last week. Some may have escaped because of Bush administration negligence involving a leak.

I am neither GOP nor Dem....
I am neither liberal nor conservative....

....But, if this story is true, than that makes TWICE the number of times the Bush Administration (read ADMINISTRATION - not GW) let the cat out of the bag and ended up jeopardizing an agent in the field.....Carl Rove is not going to like this story coming out at this time.

Makes GW's team look pretty "loose" in how they handle info. But, I am sure past administrations had the same issues, but just covered them up better.....for all you Dems out there before you jump on the "I hate GW bandwagon" -- remember, JFK's administrtaion were no angels either. Neither was Nixon's (Watergate), Carter's, Ford's, Regan's, Bush Sr.'s, etc.

Homerun, you're just a pink panty wearing libber commie who doesn't have the guts to get the job done :hihi:

-spence

Every time they catch someone remotely important they blab it all over the news.

Its all about approval ratings.

Okay, if the bacon idea won't fly, how about spare ribs?


mmmmmmm, ribs.

Pork back ribs, or how about a beef short rib ragu?

God I love ribs :drool:

-spence

Homerun, you're just a pink panty wearing libber commie who doesn't have the guts to get the job done Alright Mr. Rove-Spence, you've outted me.....nailed me right on the head......now I have to look over my shoulder every day for some militant, PLM-slinging conservative looking to take me out with an innuendo right in the head :laughs:

quote FWW "Put cooked bacon in every subway car, cargo ship, airport."

we could have a bunches of portable george forman grills going...

bacon everybody? :)

after nine/eleven there was this guy complaining about the american flag hanging outside a neighbors apartment building.
wasnt that a clue?.....that this >>guy<< was a "stupid bad guy"....
that really pissed me off that no one figured that out....right away.

i dont believe in LOCKING UP America for screwing up... mainly because the rest of the americans have to foot the bill....and because the people going in come out worse people than before they went in..in many cases. Yet others get the message and fly right afterwards. Morality has taken a nose dive
in that -crimes are being committed by children more and more and more.
i dont think throwing them in prison is the solution....and is (will be)Part of the problem.


perhaps it would be better to have all criminals made to clean up the environment / fix roads ect, for no wages...

the more severe the crime....the more remote the location....with infa red
scanners, dogs ,bracelets implanted rfid tags and choppers there's no getting away.

imo ...the media has become a terrorist organization in itself because of that insatiable thirst for exposing everything instantaniously before thinking of the consequences.... just to get freakin ratings.

Pork back ribs, or how about a beef short rib ragu?

God I love ribs :drool:

-spence

Mmmmmmmm, beef short ribs ... mmmmmmmmm :drool:

Actually, bratwursts would be more pleasing to the eye in mass transit stations than a stirng of pork ribs. And they're usually pre-cooked, so even if they've turned green and have a few flies on 'em, you can just grab a snack and foil terrorists at the same time. :hidin:

we could have janet jackson posters exposing both breasts lol

if thats what it takes to keep them off all the transportation....

its so crazy... we grow up as babies loving breasts....then are told

never to look at them .....it's indecent....not proper, until your a certain age...

then it's perfectly fine...be youthful and lustful....and then as you age ...

hey dont be lookin at them anymore because your ........now you're an old pervert...

i say: use those breasts as weapons againt the bad guys .....:hihi:

Ahh, Raven, if you've ever been to Europe, pictures of women's breasts are everwhere. It doesn't seem to faze terrorists. I think I recall some of the 9/11 hjiackers going to a nudie bar the night before the WTC attacks. Their idea of blending in.

In this country, we'd be more likely to sprinkle some fried pork rind snacks on the subway platforms rather than paste up some topless hotties. :hee:

Raven for President...!! :claps: :claps:

Makes GW's team look pretty "loose" in how they handle info. .

I disagree. this administration is the most secrative administration this country has ever seen. For instance, remember the big Energy summit at the whitehouse- top secret, closed doors- we will never know what went on in there. How many state of the union adresses have we had durring this administration??? not many.. These guys are sneaky to the core. :hs:

Raven for President...!! :claps: :claps:

:laughs: and the first thing i'd do as president....is to re-establish the presidential vegetable garden similar to what Thomas jefferson had. :btu:

then a citzen of America ID impossible to forge with a microchip inside.

then i would form a new military out of the meanest most badda$$ mofo's in Prison and say if you want out....then your going to war. your choice.
kick ass in here or free out there with guns.

i'd kick the media out of everything and tellem to shut the hell up.
alls their doing is spilling the beans and are out of control to the
point that americans are dying from their interference.

Friday, July 15, 2005

Well, it didn't take long, did it?

In the USA, the curtain opened on new anti-terror follies Wednesday when three Senate committees, in blustery response to the London bombings, voted to extend the power of the FBI under the Patriot Act to obtain library records without a subpoena. Exactly what suicide bomber or sleeper cell has so far been exposed by this powerful new intelligence weapon, we are not told. Did Osama fail to return his copy of 'Harry Potter'? Or 'Hijacking for Idiots'?

What we have here is the great con: to get us to pull each other's hair over the sanctity of library card privacy. We're dragged into some nit-wit debate over the "balance between security and civil liberties" -- with the defenders of America against terrorism sneering at the sissies from the ACLU.

Civil libertarians are all shook up that the FBI is going through our summer reading list. My concern is deeper. What I want to know is, who at the FBI is poring over my choice of novels, how much do we pay this guy and why isn't he reviewing Swiss and Pakistani bank transfer records instead?

If our nation's safety depends on enlisting Miriam the Librarian for anti-terror espionage, then I'm checking out.

****
Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. Subscribe to his commentaries or view his investigative reports for BBC Television at www.GregPalast.com.

If our nation's safety depends on enlisting Miriam the Librarian for anti-terror espionage, then I'm checking out. Then check out dude, because our nation's security now entails enlisting EVERY American.

BTW - your book sucked....!! A bunch of conspiracy theories with no proof of anything.

Actually his book was good, and every single one of his "conspiracy theories" were backed with evidence.

I must be a terrorist then, I'm reading "Among the Believers". :bshake:

Did you know that before a suicide bomber blows himself to bits that he wraps his shlong in a towel to protect it from the explosion. That way he can use it for all the virgins waiting for him in heaven. So if your on a train and an extremist is approaching you with a lump in his pants he's either happy to see you or you'd better high tail it out of there. I wonder if bubble wrap would work as equally well? :confused:

Actually his book was good, and every single one of his "conspiracy theories" were backed with evidence. I'll repaea......his book sucked.

I love the part where he claims the Florida election debacle of a few years ago was planned well ahead of the election by the Bushes.......please......give me a break. The Bushes aren't smart enough to pull off half of the stuff this guy claims they did.

Sometimes %$%$%$%$ just happens.......there doesn't always need to be some major conspiracy behind everything.