If there was another 9/11 scale attack on the US

[UNIT]

What game is that UNIT?

Is that the game where you believe americans lost sight of humanity years ago, so you believe it is fine if you do the same.

No I dont suppose you want to play that game.

I never said that. I simply put forth the idea that as humans it is sadly understandable that as a result of their 'shock and awe' shenanigans, the Americans wont have as many tears shed for them if they were to cop another 9/11 style attack. Of course no innocent person deserves to die like that, but all these American 'patriots' like Toby Keith, Sean Hannity and Bill O Reilly, that love seeing there military blow to hell all these little pxxx ant countries, if they die...well im not gonna lose any sleep.

 

[CharlieG]

UNIT, grow up.

Do I really need to list the consequences of another major attack on the US? I suspect so:
a) A lot of innocent people will die.
b) The US government would have an even stronger hold on world politics, with a domestic mandate to amp up the 'War on Terror', stay in Iraq, maybe attack Iran and so on. You could even see American public opinion start to favour such obscenities as a draft and pre-emptive use of WMDs.
c) Even more innocent people will die.
d) The world economy will plunge into recession.
e) More innocent people will die.
f) A 21st century arms race becomes more plausible.
g) Yep, you guessed it. Innocent people die.

 

[Murray]

UNIT, grow up.

Do I really need to list the consequences of another major attack on the US? I suspect so:
a) A lot of innocent people will die.
b) The US government would have an even stronger hold on world politics, with a domestic mandate to amp up the 'War on Terror', stay in Iraq, maybe attack Iran and so on. You could even see American public opinion start to favour such obscenities as a draft and pre-emptive use of WMDs.
c) Even more innocent people will die.
d) The world economy will plunge into recession.
e) More innocent people will die.
f) A 21st century arms race becomes more plausible.
g) Yep, you guessed it. Innocent people die.

Not (d) it will be the reverse of that, the world economy will expand, that is one of the reasons why we have wars.

Oh, and yes - Innocent people will surely die

 

[CharlieG]

Not (d) it will be the reverse of that, the world economy will expand, that is one of the reasons why we have wars.

Oh, and yes - Innocent people will surely die

... a major terrorist attack (say a dirty bomb) in one of the American cities that Dave mentioned would drive the world into recession very, very quickly. An American military build-up might kick-start the recovery, but it would be a slow process.

 

[Murray]

... a major terrorist attack (say a dirty bomb) in one of the American cities that Dave mentioned would drive the world into recession very, very quickly. An American military build-up might kick-start the recovery, but it would be a slow process.

We disagree - but that's OK

 

[dan warna]

so?

IMO the americans are the biggest terrorist nation in the world. they kill consistantly many innocent people P/A than almost any other nation int he world

honduras, panama, afghanistan, iran, iraq, korea, vietnam, laos, libya, , etc

and they support some of the worst dictators going around, including saddam hussein, the shah, marcos, sukarno, the northern alliance, pinochet etc .

 

[dan warna]

UNIT, grow up.

Do I really need to list the consequences of another major attack on the US? I suspect so:
a) A lot of innocent people will die.
b) The US government would have an even stronger hold on world politics, with a domestic mandate to amp up the 'War on Terror', stay in Iraq, maybe attack Iran and so on. You could even see American public opinion start to favour such obscenities as a draft and pre-emptive use of WMDs.
c) Even more innocent people will die.
d) The world economy will plunge into recession.
e) More innocent people will die.
f) A 21st century arms race becomes more plausible.
g) Yep, you guessed it. Innocent people die.

a) america has killed many times the no of innocents of the 2750 who died on s11 from OBLs attack
b) america has been sprung bribing at the UN, the US economy and 'aid' is enough to control many small nations as well as the threat of economic embargo, right or wrong the US uses that power already to lobby the world. no wmds were launched by the iraqis in the iraq war although the US used the daisy cutter which is killed thousands per bomb when used on iraqi barracks including killing civilians, I posted the links before. the daisy cutter is an obscenity.
c) probably right, mainly killed by the americans though
d) probably right
e)see c
f) america under george bush has increased defence spending from $270 billion to about $980 billion, in a six year period, with massive borrowings and cuts to welfare, education and health, while delivering trillion dollar tax cuts to the wealthiest 10% of the nation
g)see c and e

 

[CharlieG]

a) america has killed many times the no of innocents of the 2750 who died on s11 from OBLs attack

Not really the point.

b) america has been sprung bribing at the UN, the US economy and 'aid' is enough to control many small nations as well as the threat of economic embargo, right or wrong the US uses that power already to lobby the world. no wmds were launched by the iraqis in the iraq war although the US used the daisy cutter which is killed thousands per bomb when used on iraqi barracks including killing civilians, I posted the links before. the daisy cutter is an obscenity.

War is an obscenity. My point is that another major terrorist attack will release many of the few remaining constraints remain on American foreign policy.

c) probably right, mainly killed by the americans though

The point is that it doesn't matter who is doing the killing. That is why the Iraq war is such a ********-up. People think that Americans 'having the right intentions' (ha ha) makes it ok that Iraqis are dying in their tens of thousands. It doesn't. But by the same token - American slaughter does not validate mass slaughter by Iranians, Chinese, Israelis, Russians or anybody else.

f) america under george bush has increased defence spending from $270 billion to about $980 billion, in a six year period, with massive borrowings and cuts to welfare, education and health, while delivering trillion dollar tax cuts to the wealthiest 10% of the nation

That's more of a work-out than an arms race. Unless they're just trying to beat their PB... which is probably the case.

 

[dan warna]

as I've said before the old men have a lot to answer for as well as the sad people who make apologies for bush, sharon, OBL, saddam, Blair etc.

all in the one basket IMO.

 

[camsmith]

Ok dan, Murray, UNIT...

How are we meant to stop these Terror organisations from growing?

 

[spanky ham]

Ok dan, Murray, UNIT...

How are we meant to stop these Terror organisations from growing?

Invade Iraq

 

[dan warna]

Ok dan, Murray, UNIT...

How are we meant to stop these Terror organisations from growing?

well stop supporting the USA and eventually the won't have the power to kill the vast numbers of innocent people they are currently killing.

sure there might be a small economic loss, but to end terror I think its a good idea to boycott these terror merchants.

 

[dan warna]

Invade Iraq

lmfao I assume you are being tongue in cheek as even the CIA said that invading iraq would massively increase al qaeda numbers.

which it is.

If OBL was alive he'd be laughing at the stupidity of Bush.

OBL is/was a madman after personal power instead of the betterment of anything or anyone else.

what does he care if iraq burns even as his organisation gets stronger.

instead of a rif raf bunch of 50 or 60 losers, now they have thousands flocking to their banner or emulating their madness.

idiots from around the world are dedicating their sad lives to the cause of al qaeda without even knowing what it is killing innocent lives.

meanwhile tens of thousands have died in the US led crusade to control the oilfields.

 

[camsmith]

well stop supporting the USA and eventually the won't have the power to kill the vast numbers of innocent people they are currently killing.

sure there might be a small economic loss, but to end terror I think its a good idea to boycott these terror merchants.

Hrmm.. stop supporting the USA?

Sorry but i don't see a clear suggestion from you.

Invade Iraq

Sounds like a step in the right direction to me..

 

[dan warna]

Hrmm.. stop supporting the USA?

Sorry but i don't see a clear suggestion from you.






Sounds like a step in the right direction to me..

absolutely we are now supporting the USA which is the biggest terrorist nation in the world killing more innocent civilians that ever before, and supporting MORE anti-democratic dictatorships than even the russians and Chinese do.

as for the right step, even the CIA warned that an invasion of iraq would INCREASE terrorism and recruitment for terrorists.

 

[PAFC2004]

You people have to stop acting like it is the entire american population that orchestrates these things in the middle east.

 

[camsmith]

lmfao I assume you are being tongue in cheek as even the CIA said that invading iraq would massively increase al qaeda numbers.

which it is.

If OBL was alive he'd be laughing at the stupidity of Bush.

OBL is/was a madman after personal power instead of the betterment of anything or anyone else.

what does he care if iraq burns even as his organisation gets stronger.

instead of a rif raf bunch of 50 or 60 losers, now they have thousands flocking to their banner or emulating their madness.

idiots from around the world are dedicating their sad lives to the cause of al qaeda without even knowing what it is killing innocent lives.

meanwhile tens of thousands have died in the US led crusade to control the oilfields.

Uh yes the oil... it's all about the oil.


Forgive me if im wrong, but i still dont see you tell me a way of STOPPING terrorists.

 

[dan warna]

You people have to stop acting like it is the entire american population that orchestrates these things in the middle east.

who said anything about the people. most americans don't know or don't care what their government do, same in Australia.

most americans are like most iraqis are like most australians, they want a decent job, a decent wage, a safe place for their family etc.

which is why when OBL killed 2700 or whatever americans civilians it was a crime.

SAME when the US killed tens of thousands of afghan and iraqi civilians to control the oil resources of iraq, it is a crime.

 

[dan warna]

Uh yes the oil... it's all about the oil.


Forgive me if im wrong, but i still dont see you tell me a way of STOPPING terrorists.

I did, I said stop supporting the terrorist actions of the USA.

that will stop recruitment of terrorists.

your support of invading iraq HAS INCREASED recruitment of terrorists.

of course folks like you think killing innocent iraqis is ok but killing innocent americans is bad.

meanwhile thousands are queuing up to join the lunatics of zarqawi and OBL who previously had nothing in common with them.

of course this was predicted, but folks like you supported invading iraq anyway.

the way to stop terrorists is to repudiate the actions of the USA, and isolate the USA.

now why don't you go and read some more white house press releases and come back with more lies and rubbish from condie and donnie.

 

[dan warna]

Questions for you neo cons aside from the legalities of the war in iraq.

1. do you deny that the invasion of afghanistan and iraq has increased recruitment of terrorists (because of you do it would put you at odds with published comments by the CIA, british intelligence and almost every agency that has published an opinion on this matter).

2. do you deny that as a consequence of increased recruitment of terrorists that there has been an increase in security measures by nations party to the invasion that has resulted in a reduction of civil liberties by the citizens of these nations? (ie. britain, USA and australia)

3. do you deny that contracts have been granted for the control of vast economic oil resources in Iraq to haliburton which is a company closely aligned with the Republicans in the USA and despite numerous issues raised by military staff regarding overcharging, lack of products and corrupt practices no legal action has been taken by the government to limit these contracts?

 

[- PC -]

UNIT, grow up.

Do I really need to list the consequences of another major attack on the US? I suspect so:
a) A lot of innocent people will die.
b) The US government would have an even stronger hold on world politics, with a domestic mandate to amp up the 'War on Terror', stay in Iraq, maybe attack Iran and so on. You could even see American public opinion start to favour such obscenities as a draft and pre-emptive use of WMDs.
c) Even more innocent people will die.
d) The world economy will plunge into recession.
e) More innocent people will die.
f) A 21st century arms race becomes more plausible.
g) Yep, you guessed it. Innocent people die.

Us tinfoil hat wearers would suggest that a,c,e and g would be collateral damage the New World Order would accept in gaining b and f.

d is not my area of expertise but I would suggest instead of a recession it would force a shifting of funds as noted by DW

 

[- PC -]

Ok dan, Murray, UNIT...

How are we meant to stop these Terror organisations from growing?

Firstly by not giving them a reason to grow. I understand terrorism will always be around... but the breeding ground is usually found in war created poverty areas. Palestine, Syria, Libya and now Afghanistan and Iraq. Northern Ireland in the 20s and the Anarchists of Russia in the 1880s were driven by poverty and an oppression by ''someone who had more food''.

The focus on the Middle East has been sharply drawn in over 50 years... the founding fathers and mothers of the State of Israel were all terrorists...or freedom fighters depending on your semantics. The need by the US to side with Israel , due to a large number of American Jews , has created a sharp division and made America and Israel the bullies in some peoples eyes. Americas continual, and some say , blind support of Israel has led the US and Israel to be viewed as conjoined twins... different bodies and heads but connected.

The other issue for terrorism has been the dominance of Islam and the splintering of those groups whose interpretations are different eg Shiites, Sunnis etc. The one thing in Americas favour is that religious freedom is guaranteed which takes the pressure cooker off of those who may feel downtrodden. Not so in those ME countries , co-existence has not been an easy road to travel in the Muslim faith.

There has also been a shift in how the media has allowed itself to be used as whores of any group wishing to claim a piece of ground.. Arafat and the PLO point in case. How a group that won worldwide condemnation in 1972 could have the media then pressure Israel into at least negotiating with them would have made Ben-Gurion proud.

There are a lot of reasons for terrorism , but the US by ''liberating/invading'' Iraq has spawned more children of death than any potato famine could.

 

[camsmith]

I did, I said stop supporting the terrorist actions of the USA.

that will stop recruitment of terrorists.

your support of invading Iraq HAS INCREASED recruitment of terrorists.

of course folks like you think killing innocent iraqis is ok but killing innocent americans is bad.

meanwhile thousands are queuing up to join the lunatics of zarqawi and OBL who previously had nothing in common with them.

of course this was predicted, but folks like you supported invading iraq anyway.

the way to stop terrorists is to repudiate the actions of the USA, and isolate the USA.

now why don't you go and read some more white house press releases and come back with more lies and rubbish from condie and donnie.

That wont stop the REAL terrorists, that will just help them.. Which i know you would probably love to do, but sorry.. it wont happen.

of course folks like you think killing innocent iraqis is ok but killing innocent americans is bad.

To even think that i would be OK with innocent Iraqis being killed is just ludicrous. Every human deserves the right to live, no matter where they are from, i get saddened by the death of any innocent human.


OBL was around way way before the Iraq war and running training camps... so i don't see you logic there.

And about Press releases from the white house, you should know i only get my info of fox news Which of course is basically run by the white house isn't my friend Dan Warna.

 

[camsmith]

Firstly by not giving them a reason to grow. I understand terrorism will always be around... but the breeding ground is usually found in war created poverty areas. Palestine, Syria, Libya and now Afghanistan and Iraq. Northern Ireland in the 20s and the Anarchists of Russia in the 1880s were driven by poverty and an oppression by ''someone who had more food''.

The focus on the Middle East has been sharply drawn in over 50 years... the founding fathers and mothers of the State of Israel were all terrorists...or freedom fighters depending on your semantics. The need by the US to side with Israel , due to a large number of American Jews , has created a sharp division and made America and Israel the bullies in some peoples eyes. Americas continual, and some say , blind support of Israel has led the US and Israel to be viewed as conjoined twins... different bodies and heads but connected.

The other issue for terrorism has been the dominance of Islam and the splintering of those groups whose interpretations are different eg Shiites, Sunnis etc. The one thing in Americas favour is that religious freedom is guaranteed which takes the pressure cooker off of those who may feel downtrodden. Not so in those ME countries , co-existence has not been an easy road to travel in the Muslim faith.

There has also been a shift in how the media has allowed itself to be used as whores of any group wishing to claim a piece of ground.. Arafat and the PLO point in case. How a group that won worldwide condemnation in 1972 could have the media then pressure Israel into at least negotiating with them would have made Ben-Gurion proud.

There are a lot of reasons for terrorism , but the US by ''liberating/invading'' Iraq has spawned more children of death than any potato famine could.

Nice response.

But.... your saying we should never has invaded Iraq, leaving a guy like Saddam in charge, now i know there are many Saddam's around the world, but the fact that he sponsors terrorists doesn't help his case.

Are you saying that the US, UK and us, should just carry on with life, and not worry about what is happening in other countries, even if it could be deadly.

We should just let those in the ME keep living on with dictators running the place?

Nice post though, I'll give you that, i was just after more of a, what can we do?

Yes not give them a reason to grow, but they will grow.... they want to spread throughout the world, just look at all the countries they have hit...

 

[camsmith]

Questions for you neo cons aside from the legalities of the war in iraq.

1. do you deny that the invasion of afghanistan and iraq has increased recruitment of terrorists (because of you do it would put you at odds with published comments by the CIA, british intelligence and almost every agency that has published an opinion on this matter).

I don't deny that, they hate that Iraqi's want democracy. But i know that in the long term, we will have a lesser threat, so i guess, the answer is yes i deny that, we will be safer.

2. do you deny that as a consequence of increased recruitment of terrorists that there has been an increase in security measures by nations party to the invasion that has resulted in a reduction of civil liberties by the citizens of these nations? (ie. britain, USA and australia)

There has been an increase in security measures, yes, at times like this.. you need them. If there weren't people would be complaining that the government arn't doing enough to protect them...

3. do you deny that contracts have been granted for the control of vast economic oil resources in Iraq to haliburton which is a company closely aligned with the Republicans in the USA and despite numerous issues raised by military staff regarding overcharging, lack of products and corrupt practices no legal action has been taken by the government to limit these contracts?

Dude take a breath. I agree the the oil in Iraq is helping Iraq grow into a richer country.

Talking about corruption, do you agree that the UN have been doing secret deals with Mr Saddam himself, that is the same UN in which the left are in love in.


Now that i have answered you questions (briefly i know but still...) please answer mine.

With bombs going off all over the world, how can we stop them?