Not one attack?? PLEASE :(

Uk past history will prove it is quite easy if you have a real enemy

We suffered several bombs etc courtesy of the IRA in 70s/80s although most were designed to injure/maim/frighten as opposed to mass killings

I think the warrington bomb brought everyone to their senses when two children were killed by a bomb in a litter bin on a busy town centre street.

Originally posted by alienstar
I heard rumors that terrorist get huge donations from big oil companies from the middle east that support their funding and they are seeking now to get ahold of fighter planes,such as Bin Ladens group.

As you said at the beginning of your post, rumors. Pardon the one liner but it's stuff like this that causes problems.

OK ATS-ers...great job responding...just back to computer from work. Many great points here...thx for the dialog. Here's question two that has been bugging me as well.

If it's plausible that "there aren't that many bad guys" answer is the right one...I'm going to get somewhat political here, so please take a deep breath...and ponder this one as well....

"WOO-SAA!"

OK...here goes...

If there are not that many bad guys...

1) Why has George Bush, (who I respect, don't always agree with though) allowed his reputation...and legacy to be trashed? He is a man, just like you and me...who wants people to appreciate his work...who finds a great degree of self actualization, like any other man, from his occupation...

He has willingly spent 7 years and trillions of dollars, to fight a small amount of bad guys?????

Could there be something else in this scenario? Could there be something very dangerous over there? That we are looking for?

Think about it...our economy, our reputation in the world and some would argue our security in the world...has all gone to hell in a hand basket...over a few bad guys??????????

It does not add up to me?

Again, no silver linning in my question...just seeking some smart folks' opinions...

OldThinker

reply to post by OldThinker


To quite simply answer your question about Bush's self respect. If you give me, or I was making enough money... I wouldn't give a flying ( fill in the blank ) what people thought of me! Why should he ( cuz he's president? ) Ya he should but if enough cash and he would sell his own MOM. ( poor Barb) I really thnk it's that simple amigo!

[edit on 17-7-2008 by Young minded old soul]

No! No!

Bush owned the Texas Rangers...before he came to the White House, he was rich rich rich before that...please slow down (no condemnation of your ideas here at all) just take a minute, slow down and think about it...please.

Mr. Bush is worth about 30mil...he had that BEFORE coming to the White House...his worth is about half of that of Dick Cheney...

All his needs and that of his family have long been met...please consider this and re-read my earlier comments again...

He was and is already wealthly enough for 100 families....this is about one man and one man's impression of his legacy...please slow down and reconsider my points.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by OldThinker]

[edit on 17-7-2008 by OldThinker]

BUSH WAS RICH BEFORE COMING TO THE WHITE HOUSE...THIS IS NOT ABOUT MONEY FOR HE AND HIS FAMILY....THERE IS MORE TO THIS STORY THAN THIS....ANYONE OUT THERE READING THIS???????

reply to post by OldThinker

Yes. So do you think he's honestly doing what he considers best for the country/world? If so, what is that; if not, do you think he has another agenda?

Edit to add: repost of my opinion from another thread; most of the times I think this is the case:

George Bush seems to me to be a man ensnared in a worldview with dual absolute moral perspectives. He seems to genuinely believe that his actions are good and righteous, and the fact that the rest of the world doesn't always agree is the cross he must carry. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men". He sees himself as the righteous man.

This is why he's always talking about letting 'history be the judge'. It's his only hope for vindication; his actions, such as they are good, will always be seen as evil. He's willing to martyr himself to such a fate in the present, if that's what it takes.

But the question is: what exactly is the worldview that motivates his true agenda?


[edit on 17-7-2008 by Ian McLean]

IAN, THERE YOU GO...THANKS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THIS DISCUSSION...

I DON'T KNOW THE MIND OF THE MAN, BUT I CAN THINK ABOUT HOW... I WOULD ACT...

I HAVE A JOB, I'M RICH (hypothetically speaking) AND I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION IN THE WORLD...

EVERY HISTORIAN IN THE NEXT 100 YEARS IS GOING TO WRITE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT MY EVERY MOVE, MY DECISIONS AND WHAT I DO...ALL OF THIS WILL BE IN EVERY ELEMENTARY HISTORY TEXT THAT EVERY KID WILL EVERY READ....

AND I WILLINGLY SACRIFICE MY LEGACY FOR A GROUP OF A FEW HUNDRED BAD GUYS????????????? NO WAY! THIS DOES NOT ADD UP...THOUGHTS?

Originally posted by Buck Division

Originally posted by re22666

Originally posted by Buck Division
I am with you. OF COURSE there have been multiple attacks that have been dismissed and suppressed. Train wrecks, explosions, poisonings, and fires. In fact, the fires in California are probably terrorist related. How about the levees in New Orleans? I would believe it is possible.

I am convinced that the Columbia disaster was a terrorist plot. (They declared it to be a non-terrorist event immediately, without any investigation of whether it might be a result of sabotage!)

based on what? what inside knowledge do you have of all these attacks that no one is reporting? are you in on them? There have been fires in CA since the beginning of fire and trees. There was never any debate over why the levees failed, it was predicted that they were not going to hold up to the oncoming hurricaine. or did terrorists cause the hurricaine?

You aren't reading what I wrote, and misquoting me as well. Please don't be so overly defensive. It is not productive. (Or maybe that is what you are striving for?)

Perhaps the reason that the USA can't be trusted with the truth is because people like yourself have a tendency to overreact to things, start swinging at what you don't understand, and haven't bothered to think through.

As for the fires in CA, please do some research to prove I am wrong, and then report back. It is clear that all these fires are not due to natural causes, but if you think otherwise, go ahead and show me some statistics.

Edit: Here is a link of interest. It took me ten seconds to find it. Where is YOUR supporting evidence there, buddy? Take a shot.

www.homelandsecurityus.com...



[edit on 17-7-2008 by Buck Division]

train wrecks, bombings, the challenger, the ca fires.....
want proof of all those things i just said?
here is some stuff saying there are more fires than usual and it is anomolous.

yeah got me there.

reply to post by OldThinker


Power my friend. Once you have more money than you'll ever use in a lifetime, the power you can exert with it expands the ego to the point where critics are laughed off and you are God.

When it comes to GB all I can think of is how much he's enjoying himself back here in the states while the troops are dieing over there. He's always smiling, goes golfing, lives the high life and even said (paraphrasing) his and his wifes life is like a slice of heaven. Now I know he can't be on the front lines but he shows a lot more happiness than concern about the way things are.

Now I'm not a welfare state type of person but when he vetoed that medicaid deal to help the elderly it made me sick. He's willing to help the world but ignores his own people. He justified his veto with a quite reasonable explanation and that it was best for the elderly until you find out that it was the elderly groups of the nation that were pushing the bill. They didn't want Bush's way. And he ignored them.

Do you really think he cares what the average citizen thinks about him (his legacy)? He is on a power mad high and the only reason he is where he is is because he was born into oil and had the family connections to make it possible.

I'll never be able to understand how he sat there in that class room after learning "America is under attack", and why he wasn't rushed out by the secret service (which is protocol) unless he KNEW he wasn't under any threat. But that's another subject.

So now you know the legacy (and there's much more) he has left me. Know what? I'll guarantee you he doesn't care.

Originally posted by Buck Division

train wrecks, bombings, the challenger, the ca fires.....
want proof of all those things i just said?
here is some stuff saying there are more fires than usual and it is anomolous.

yeah got me there.

more fires than usual and it is anomolous.
and again, how does this demonstrate bombings and train wrecks that i still have seen no evidence of?

seriously, is this what passes for intelligent discourse here?
i ask for PROOF of the numerous terrorist attacks within the US i dont know about and i get slapped in the face with
more fires than usual in a place the burns every year??
that is proof of what again?
look up proof
look up bombings and train wrecks
then get back to me

Originally posted by re22666

Originally posted by Buck Division

Originally posted by re22666

Originally posted by Buck Division
I am with you. OF COURSE there have been multiple attacks that have been dismissed and suppressed. Train wrecks, explosions, poisonings, and fires. In fact, the fires in California are probably terrorist related. How about the levees in New Orleans? I would believe it is possible.

I am convinced that the Columbia disaster was a terrorist plot. (They declared it to be a non-terrorist event immediately, without any investigation of whether it might be a result of sabotage!)

based on what? what inside knowledge do you have of all these attacks that no one is reporting? are you in on them? There have been fires in CA since the beginning of fire and trees. There was never any debate over why the levees failed, it was predicted that they were not going to hold up to the oncoming hurricaine. or did terrorists cause the hurricaine?

You aren't reading what I wrote, and misquoting me as well. Please don't be so overly defensive. It is not productive. (Or maybe that is what you are striving for?)

Perhaps the reason that the USA can't be trusted with the truth is because people like yourself have a tendency to overreact to things, start swinging at what you don't understand, and haven't bothered to think through.

As for the fires in CA, please do some research to prove I am wrong, and then report back. It is clear that all these fires are not due to natural causes, but if you think otherwise, go ahead and show me some statistics.

Edit: Here is a link of interest. It took me ten seconds to find it. Where is YOUR supporting evidence there, buddy? Take a shot.

www.homelandsecurityus.com...



[edit on 17-7-2008 by Buck Division]

train wrecks, bombings, the challenger, the ca fires.....
want proof of all those things i just said?
here is some stuff saying there are more fires than usual and it is anomolous.

yeah got me there.

i do not need to even look at that link. there is arson every year. so this year there is a little more in CA. ok fine, you got me. but you said bombings, train wrecks, and even the space shuttle. prove those things with something other than CA fires since there is no relation.

Good thread.

I think it comes down to a few factors. First of all, there are some very well-trained and equipped agencies working quite dutifully to prevent such an attack from occurring, aided by unprecedented technological networks and surveillance rights and a generally cooperative and vigilant public.

But, as you said, even this shouldn't be able to prevent more sporadically-planned, amateur attacks perpetrated by a single non-suspicious person or small group against a low-risk target.

My thoughts here are that the government and media overstate the amount of people who actually have the desire and ability to carry out an attack. People living in America aren't exposed to the level of abject poverty and desperation that can motivate a seemingly endless parade of willing suicide bombers, and most of the people who immigrate to this country do so in search of better opportunities. They may practice Islam, and many of them even justify bombings such as those that occurred on 9/11 right down to the lesser attacks. But this doesn't mean they'd go and do the same, killing themselves and innocent people who have no ties to the actions of the government.

Something will probably slip through the cracks eventually (especially if Obama is elected), and hopefully if that happens it won't happen to me!

i guess my biggest problem is this. why has no terrorist gone to a shopping mall and blown it up. i am certainly NOT advocating this but I am not the first to mention the idea either so im not giving anyone any help. think about it, if say, 10 guys, all spread out. living their own undercover lives or even being a tourist with some prearranged connections. it would not take much at all. one guy, explosives, mall. get all 10 guys all over the country to go at randome but sort ofclose times and it wouldnt be long before every shopping mall became a ghost town. i am just saying, if terrorism is the overwhelming, omnipresent threat that our government insists we need to give up so many rights for, then why not pull off something so basic and easy, even if it doesnt kill alot of people it would effect lives, the economy, all kinds of ripples and isnt that what terrorism is for? terror? not death.

?????????

DOES…

Hypothesis #1 “Not that many bad guys” (+) plus….

Hypothesis #2 “Bush willing to trash his legacy for Iraq/ Spend trillions of dollars/resources over there”

EQUAL? We are over in Babylon and Persia for another threat more graven?

?????????

Originally posted by OldThinker

?????????

DOES…

Hypothesis #1 “Not that many bad guys” (+) plus….

Hypothesis #2 “Bush willing to trash his legacy for Iraq/ Spend trillions of dollars/resources over there”

EQUAL? We are over in Babylon and Persia for another threat more graven?

?????????

no

reply to post by scientist


Scientist...

You said,"as for the OP, probably just because not many people feel like killing themselves in such a way... "

Do you realize there are factions in the middle east that raise the children to hate American and many are trained from day one to be suicide bombers...and yet not one attack here in America?

R we that good? Or as scientist proposes, there are not that many who want to harm us in this way?

Well, the answer is obvious and easy. The terrorists ‘hate us because of our freedom’ right? So, since the patriot act, et al, we are no longer free, and they see no reason to attack us! Ok, that was cheap, but everything else has been said already.

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

Originally posted by OldThinker
No! No!

Bush owned the Texas Rangers...before he came to the White House, he was rich rich rich before that...please slow down (no condemnation of your ideas here at all) just take a minute, slow down and think about it...please.

Yes Bush was rich before he became president, but it was because of his last name and his being slated from early on to be a political puppet, not because anything he ever accomplished. Bush was never 'owner' of the Rangers, rather, he was the figurehead of an ownership group, of which he had only a very small percentage of actual ownership, and that was practically gifted to him. This was done to give him name recognition so he could be made governor on his way to the white house. Before that, he bankrupted every venture that he ever convinced anyone to finance. Bush is a born loser and he's taking the whole damn country down with him this time.

www.angelfire.com...

Oh, and bush is no Texan! He was born in Connecticut, and educated at Yale and Harvard. He vacations in Maine, and is an east coast elitist born and bred. So there.

Got it all figured out young man...I fell better!

Talk to me in 10 years, you'll have changed your mind at least 5 times on this very subject...

This subject is nothing to be trivial about...

Originally posted by OldThinker
BUSH WAS RICH BEFORE COMING TO THE WHITE HOUSE...THIS IS NOT ABOUT MONEY FOR HE AND HIS FAMILY....THERE IS MORE TO THIS STORY THAN THIS....ANYONE OUT THERE READING THIS???????

Oldthinker do some old research on greed. Its about money and power plain and simple as that. Most of our events revolve around money one way or the other deal with it. Greed runs this nation and that is how it is. We have a socialism in this nation that rivals others of the past. The only difference is the socialism is money being siphoned of the middle class right up to the extremely wealthy. For you to say Bush was wealthy before hand then you should just say anyone of the 100,000 or so people worth 30 million or more should just give up and not try to make anymore money they have enough. How many of that 100,000 do that? Not many. Greed my friend and when you look at whos making a killing off this war you will see. Follow the money.