terrorism threat??

[waterboy]

Does anyone really think we can make ourselves safe from terrorism? It's good to be prudent, but building a wall across our southern border is preposterous. It comes from the same people who believe that gated communities are safer and downtown is dangerous.

I challenge anyone to name a large public operation in Tulsa that is safe from terrorists. The refineries, the port, the drinking water, the airports, the high rises... ad infinitum. I personally walked into the refinery looking for help one day and stunned the workers. It was innocent to me, since 911 was so recent it hadn't sunk in, but I completely avoided their security.

Its trite I know. But if you want peace, fight for justice not for resources. Talk to your neighbors before you put up a fence. Like one vet I saw interviewed on Fox this past weekend said, "War doesn't work. We need to try other stuff."

[iplaw]

quote:
"War doesn't work. We need to try other stuff."

How profound.  Tell that to the Jews who survived concentration camps and managed to be freed by Allied forces.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:
"War doesn't work. We need to try other stuff."

How profound.  Tell that to the Jews who survived concentration camps and managed to be freed by Allied forces.

Hugs! Lots of Hugs!

Hugs are to terrorists as Kryptonite is to superman.

Whatever happened to that pig bullet rumor?

[mdunn]

If you look at the history of the modern day islamic terrorist groups,you will see that they are very paitent when it comes to their attacks.
They have no problem putting a few years in between attacks and dont ever think we will stop them.And each one gets bigger and bigger!

[iplaw]

Wow, pork fat carpet bombs...

[iplaw]

BTW, the bank analogy doesn't hold water.

Terrorist cannot be equated to bank robbers. The ultimate end game of bank robber is to take money not take lives; a HUGE distiction.  The end game of a terrorist is massive loss of human life.  We are aggressive against terrorists because of this distinction.

Also, we put police officers in banks to ward off bank robbers and put in place security measures like vaults and passwords to keep them out.  We don't pretend there are no bank robbers when they are waiting outside the door.

The security measures used by banks are not on the scale that we use to prevent terrorist attacks, but that has more to do with the stakes if left unchecked.  We are proactive against terrorists because the threat of mortal danger to great numbers is infinitely higher.  

If every time a bank robber robbed a bank we had a massive loss of life then I think we would all be demanding far more in the way of protection.

Also, as far as I recall, I don't remember bank robbers forming clans such as the Taliban and Al Qaeda and forewarning people they were going to rob banks, and if they did, you can be we'd be ready for them when they came.  More than likely they would be "pre-emptively" arrested for conspiracy to rob a bank if they telegraphed their intent like Al-Qaeda does.

Again today we see another terror plot foiled in the UK, on top of the one foiled last summer against the airlines.  Proactive tactics save lives.

[iplaw]

quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC


Banks do not try to scare you.  Banks do not round up and kill those who could potentially be criminals, or all people that somebody pointed out as possibly being a criminal, or their relatives.  Banks do not bomb suspected targets, create collateral damage and collateral fatalities.  Banks do not purposefully spawn new criminals.  

That's because robbers don't kill 3,000+ people at a time (more if they could) and do billions of dollars in property damage to iconic structures.  Robbers don't try to ignite explosives in their shoes on full to capacity planes.  Robbers don't seek to use chemical and nuclear weapons.  Robbers don't profess an interest in wiping entire segments of the world off the map... I like my apple, how's your orange?  []

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

That's because robbers don't kill 3,000+ people at a time (more if they could) and do billions of dollars in property damage to iconic structures.  Robbers don't try to ignite explosives in their shoes on full to capacity planes.  Robbers don't seek to use chemical and nuclear weapons.  Robbers don't profess an interest in wiping entire segments of the world off the map... I like my apple, how's your orange?  []

It was one of your Pro-War buddies that brought up banks.  A spectacularly useless analogy equating security at banks with the invasion of Iraq.  To the point he was trying to make, the analogy was contradictory at best.

quote:That's kind of like saying that when a bank hires an off-duty cop, spends millions of dollars on video surveillance equipment, then the bank robbers have won.

Or when major retailers have those "item detectors" at the exits which occasionally go off, making an innocent customer wait while someone goes through their purchasers then the shoplifters have won.

When the buildings came down, you can bet the people within the terrorist rings rejoiced because they knew they indeed won. But I have a feeling that none of them party when they see us taking a defensive stance. I don't think even they consider that a win.

Oranges are fer smashin'.  Not fer lookin' at.

[iplaw]

I think it was Chicken Little who equated the "war on terror" to a "war on bank robbers" you should re-read the first page...

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think it was Chicken Little who equated the "war on terror" to a "war on bank robbers" you should re-read the first page...

Ok.  Have it your way.

[rwarn17588]

I think one thing that's been overlooked in the war on terror is that security IS better than it was pre-2001.

It's not the "flypaper theory" in Iraq that's keeping terrorists from launching other attacks here; it's that it's harder for them to do so.

Airlines now have air marshals, which should have been implemented a long time ago. Security at airports is better. And the doors to the cockpits are reinforced. (Remember that whacked-out teenage kid earlier in 2000 or 2001 who kicked a hole in a cockpit door?)

Then you have Flight 93. People are no longer playing the "give the hostage-taker what he wants" playbook. Passengers are ready to take the gloves off, which is a good thing, and probably gives many would-be hijackers pause.

[MichaelC]

That's true.  Even security at Sea Ports is much better than it was.  It's not 100% yet.  Security around Chemical and Nuclear facilities needs improvement.  Intelligence and law enforcement appears to be more active and more coordinated.

The real danger is that as time goes on, we'll simply forget that these things need to be done.  And the war itself is sort of a distraction from security.  The administration asserts that our invasion of Iraq is preventative.  If you believe that to be true, security isn't so necessary.

[Chicken Little]

Robbers kill people all the time, but that's not the point.  We weren't talking about the criminal's motives and objectives.  We were talking about how society chooses to counter the actions of these criminals.

IMO, these bands of trrrrsts are plain criminals.  For all intents and purposes, Al Qaeda is just a bunch of thugs at this point...just like bank robbers, the mafia, and street gangs.  They do receive some support from theological nut jobs (which means the nut jobs are criminals, too), but they don't have open support from governments (anymore) and don't have open support from mainstream Islam.  

Sure, they may have a Robin Hood-like appeal to larger groups of mainly impoverished muslims, and that's a problem.  But I think that it is not the wacky ideology that is so appealing to these throngs.  Rather, it is this notion of resistence to a superpower that has things all f'ed up.  If we do better in the Middle East, then they do worse.  That's a policy problem.

As for combatting the gangs directly, I think you use the same kinds of methods that you do to hunt organized crime.  Go after the money.  Use informants.  Infiltrate.  Isolate them.  Protect the Public.

Fear, while politically useful for both the trrrrsts and Cheney, is not helpful.  It hurts us as a nation and causes us to undermine the very foundation on which this country was built.  War, though it has a certain rhetorical flare, is not a productive strategy either.  Most of the throngs on the muslim "street" think that the US is warring on them.  Again, it helps the bad guys more than it helps us.

We have to recognize that our strategies have failed.  Every time Cheney mumbles "mushroom cloud"; every time we invade the wrong country for the wrong reasons; we inch our way towards the reality that everyone, except the trrrsts, wants to avoid.

Will we ever end up having to blow the sh*t out of some country again?  Maybe.  Afghanistan was the right move at the right time.  But military action is just one tool in the toolbox.  Somehow, the US left the rest of the tools back at the house.  A small fraction of the money that is being spent on Iraq could be used to screen every shipping container that comes into this country.  A tiny amount of that money could be used to bribe somebody into handing over Osama.  A fraction of that money could be spent on building up relations with countries where these goons hide out, isolating and marginalizing them.  Our bad.

[iplaw]

quote:
Airlines now have air marshals, which should have been implemented a long time ago. Security at airports is better. And the doors to the cockpits are reinforced. (Remember that whacked-out teenage kid earlier in 2000 or 2001 who kicked a hole in a cockpit door?)

Then you have Flight 93. People are no longer playing the "give the hostage-taker what he wants" playbook. Passengers are ready to take the gloves off, which is a good thing, and probably gives many would-be hijackers pause.

Amen!

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think it was Chicken Little who equated the "war on terror" to a "war on bank robbers" you should re-read the first page...

Clarification:  'Twas Wrinkle who brought in the bank robber analogy.  I thought that was an ironic reference because we don't live in fear of bank robbers and feel compelled to declare war on them.

We do what Wrinkle said.  We protect the public; make it hard for them to do what they do; and hunt them down.  They're criminals.  And I think the trrrsts are criminals, too.