IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Bush admin makes me puke
Robert
post 05/05/08 8:37am
Post #16


Major
********

Group: Not The One & Only
Posts: 649
Joined: September 29th 2007
Member No.: 4677



You do realize you just made my point for me
At the time, the Al-Qaeda security briefs supplied to Bush and the Senate Security Subcommittee listed one of the possible threats as hijacking and bombing of multiple international flights, probably from Arab nations.
This was the reult of the Bojinka plot.
Sure after the fact, it's easy for someone to dig up a report which listed the possibility of using a plane as a flying bomb. As I already said this was seen as a possibility since the Paris incident in '94.

I completely agree there is a CHANCE 9-11 could have been prevented. Just not for the overly simplified reasons most people offer.
What people lose focus on is the Single minded Monday morning quarterbacking going on.
Think about it, this is the way people see it.
They knew people might fly planes into buildings, so they should have been able to stop it.
That's bullshit.
They focus on one thing because that's the one thing that did happen out of the 100 possibles things which COULD have happened.
After the fact, it's easy to ignore the other 100 possible scenario's, they would also have had to try and defend against.
What does everyone expect should have been done.
Bush or whoever use their physic powers and predict which of the 100 possible lines of attack was actually going to happen so they could defend against that single one?
People are kidding themselves if they believe most of the security measures put in place after the attack could have been done prior to 9-11.
For example, while I don't agree with everything in the patriot act, it does help to fill some of the holes in our security procedures.
Yet a lot of people would repeal it, both of the Democrat Candidates have said they would repeal it if elected.
Or another example, we still have completely unsecured borders.
For me the two biggest problems facing us is...
1) We live in one of the freest societies in the world, which make us an easy an almost undefensible target.
2) Our stupid Political Correctness will surely play a part of our downfall.

Or another way to think about it.
Here is a SHORT list of generic targets.
* Nuclear power plants
* Water supplies for large cities
* Bio-chem attacks on large population
* Large sports venues
* Large shopping malls
* High profile Federal and state government buildings.
* Commercial high rise buildings. e.g. New York’s Empire State, the Sears Tower in Chicago and large hotels and condominiums.
* High profile national monuments. e.g. Statue of Liberty.
* Power systems for large cities.
* Schools and Universities
* Bridges. San Francisco’s Golden Gate bridge, New York’s Brooklyn bridge.
Care to predict which one of the targets listed above will be the next one?
No?
Well, I guarantee you, if any of them do become a target, there will be 1000's of people with 20/20 hindsight saying
"We knew they MIGHT attack it, so it could have been prevented"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hellfighter
post 05/05/08 11:15am
Post #17


Major General
Group Icon

Group: {MOB}
Posts: 2111
Joined: November 15th 2005
From: Quebec, Canada
Member No.: 1424
Xfire: hellfighter1x



No defence is insurmountable - Rommels atlantic Wall breached in hours at all points in the D-day front....
Nothing is preventable.... but there's no rule to stop someone making an effort to take some noticeable measures at least when a strong threat is in the air- literally.
I can't find what defence Bush/cronies would not have had in heightening security at airports -historically this is a major 'battlefront' for terrorism.

Political correctness or not its our devotion to freedom and respecting people's rights that seperates us from becoming what we despise most in regimes like N.Korea, Iran, African dictatorships.....
While I agree borders are too 'holey', there should be limits to keep in mind regarding being careful to not have a jeckyl/Hyde society -ie, seeming peaceful and freedom loving and then slamming down on rights that the society's ancestors worked hard/fought for ensuring.
Taking these overt defensive measures leads to isolationism.... and its that what could've been the downfall of the USA vs. Fascism in WW2's start if it had not been compelled to act due to Pearl Harbour.
Too much high security in a society leads from one basic Right to another being squashed -and then secret police gain more powers, then more whackjobs get into powerful positions.... rules start getting more radical- and smug people who thought crackdown rules were applied only to 'undesirables' will at some point find themselves targeted by 'updated' rules by nutters in power taking things to more extremes.
.....and then people disappear and are incarcerated without trial [oh wait that's being done already-before you start on me with that tongue.gif keep in mind I have no compassion for terrorists caught in the act not seeing the light of day - I'm talking about 'suspects' ie, innocent people snatched away for interrogation right away because their name is on a terrorist watch list -> who's on that list -people like Nelson Mandela!!!!! but famous people on the list don't get hauled away for a nightmare trip ]

A true story;
An Iraqi friend told me a story about his friend in Iraq in beginning of Saddam regime. He was standing alone in an office stairwell one day deep in thought. The police picked him up some time later -and released him- someone had reported him for 'thinking'.... the informer and the police were suspicious that he had anti-government thoughts on his mind!!!
I say that so that we should keep in mind what we/society probably don't want to become. I think there's a difference between accomodating/respecting those with 'difficulties' and being politically correct to a fault. Up here in Canada multiculturalism used to be seen as a 'politically correct' idea decades ago. It's actually working out nowadays where people can be different while respecting laws basically made for everyone to follow without bending over backwards to one group over others/society in general.

So true, we in the West are more susceptible to attacks, but in my opinion if a pyscho [like terrorists] are determined to get you, they will..... The only thing helping us is Bum Laden's ego in wanting to strike with gigantic attacks and his shunning surely unstoppable small bombings ANYWHERE in the public domain.
imo, Our greatest ally is the international anti-terrorism networks -throwing up high border walls is one thing - but those 'hostile' countries we like frown upon do have agents and democracy sympathizers passing along valuable information to the West regarding plans for upcoming attacks.


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 05/06/08 4:11am


--------------------



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 03/29/24 12:20am
Skin Designed by Canucks Fan Zone