Well, somebody tried to attack targets in the US with anthrax in the wake of the 9/11 strike. Whoever did it was never caught. The probability of terrorists striking the US or Europe with bio or nuclear weapons would not seem at all outrageous in light of the events of those months.
Cynical and contemptuous remarks like this tell me you do not have a point of veiw that deserves respect. I will not waste any more of my time on you.
(shrug) Well, I was relying on memories of newspaper articles read twenty or so years ago. However, even if not done specifically to clear mine fields, the attacks were stunningly callous and brutish. I quote:
As I recall, the children were given gold-colored plastic keys to wear on chains around their necks, and the keys had an inscription that said, “I have the Ayatollah’s permission to go to heaven” (or words to that effect). Only if the United States had sent thousands of its own children, unarmed, roped together in groups of twenty, in a human wave over a mine field waving Jack Chick tracts over their heads, would we have descended to the level of insanity and brutishness of the Tehran regime. They actually managed to make Saddam Hussein look good.
The complete article is here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm
Are you serious? Every indication is that the Anthrax came from a US lab, and that the terror was home-grown. Remember Oklahoma City? Or the Atlanta bombings? Lotsa terrorism starts at home. We should worry much more about some chumpy US citizens supplying WMDs to one of our enemies, or just “checking some out” of a lab where they work and blitzing a subway.
Yes, I’m quite serious. Home-grown terrorists haven’t pulled off a strike in something like ten years, and they don’t have connections with an international network that has covert backing or support from several Mid-Eastern governments. Comparing the two is asinine. Not long after 9/11, a plot to attack the Brooklyn Bridge was discovered, thanks to the Patriot Act, and Osama and his ilk routinely issue threats against us. It is incredible, it is mind-boggling, it is simply absurd to suggest that home-grown terrorists are somehow a greater threat than Islamic fascism.
As I remember it was American anthrax, and the targets were Democrats. My guess is that they were never caught because they are presently in charge. I think it was either an attempt to kill a Democratic leader or two ( a theory I heard at the time ), or just spread fear and benefit the Republicans. And no, that’s not paranoid. The Bush Administration has shown itself to be ruthless, dishonest, and completely uncaring of life. I doubt the moral problem of killing their own citizens would even occur to them. Especially not Democrats, since the Republicans regard them as Satanic traitors.
Yeah, because cynical, contemptuous people are always wrong.
Oh, please, not the ridiculous “take out the bridge with a blowtorch” plot. That sort of nonsense is why I feel so much contempt and cynicism toward America.
Of course it is.
Yes, because unlike every other country in history, American power mad evil lunatics don’t do bad and stupid things. Like, say, torture people - whoops, looks like they do.
Given what they have already done and said, I find it perfectly believable that Bush and friends would try to kill political opponents. My only questions; would they use the “God’s Will” excuse, or the national security excuse ? Or both ? And how hard would they pat themselves on the back ?
Sorry, but that’s just unhinged. You really think Republicans would send anthrax through the mail to Democratic senators, hoping to kill them? Republicans are a bunch of murderers of their own colleagues?
Btw, you do know that Bill Frist, one of the leading Republicans in the Senate, had ricin sent to his office, right? Oh, wait! That was just to cover the fact that they were trying to kill Democrats! Or maybe Frist knew too much, and the evil cabal was trying to rub him out!
And of course, when the anthrax arrived in the Capitol, all the Republicans had their evil overlord gas masks on in case one of those detestable Democrats opened his envelope near one of the air vents. Those Republicans are clever.
It’s hard to believe now, but I can remember the time when the above would have seemed like irony.
The point is that they are acting insanely which is why they have a ‘hostile’ superpower worried about what their plans are. Like Sam Stone, I am from Alberta and I don’t lay awake at nights worrying about the US invading us. Now if I my government was composed of loony toon nut jobs (well…, more loony toon than they actually are 
), then I’d have a reason to worry.
This isn’t a chicken and egg argument. If you don’t have crazies running your country then you probably have little to worry about from the West.
Sorry, but I can’t quite get the meaning of this comment.
As for the theories being discussed by this comment, I don’t quite believe it, myself. Somehow, the thinking behind it feels a LOT like the thinking some conservatives have about the general Muslim populace, based on stuff like the cartoon riots. But that’s just me.
Considering that America imposed the Shah on them for it’s own purposes, they have no reason to believe that their government’s craziness or lack thereof will make a bit of difference.
Alberta is safe because Americans feel they can easily bully Canada into doing what they want without bothering with an army. Cut off the oil, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a push for Canadian “regime change”. Since Canada is full of white Christians, I expect it’ll take longer, that’s all.
History and USA foreign policy in the 20th and 21st century proves you wrong on that assertion as the USA interprets ‘crazy’ to mean anyone that threatens the interests of US business or strategic interests and it thinks nothing of overthrowing or undermining democratic governments and supprting the vilest of dictators.
They’ve done it once in Iran already. If the USA and the UK had left well alone then we probably wouldn’t have this problem now. And if the USA stopped pursuing a foreign policy that makes it rational for small states to nuke-up it would also help.
Jeez, do you really believe this stuff? Look, OPEC has threatened to cut off oil for a long time, and OPEC countries never got invaded over it. OPEC in fact HAS ‘cut off oil’ to the U.S., without retaliation.
Bush wasn’t in power in the past.
Ah, so you’re basically going with the “Bush Jr. is the living embodiment of pure evil” school of crackpot conspiracy theories.
Let’s see: the US pays full price (barring any discounts for us being right next to them - it is cheaper to deliver to the US from Alberta than it is to France after all) for oil like everyone else does. We sell to the highest bidder. Unless we decide to not sell to the highest bidder (which would be utterly stupid), where could there ever be a problem?
Oh, and Bush will be out in, what, two years now? Oh, by the way, Canada isn’t just full of white christians, it is full of many different people who express many different views on religion. We tend to be less religious than you guys down there. The real reason I don’t fear the US is that while we may elect incompetent rulers we don’t overtly oppress our own people (taxes excluded), nor do we have plans to build nuclear bombs, nor do we have leaders who publicly express a desire to wipe other countries off the face of the map. Rather important distinctions.
How many times has the Alberta had a wholly installed government by the US ?
Alberta does not need to fear the US, because the US has not yet done the sorts of things to it that the US has done to Iran, or Iraq.
I would imagine that any nation that had some repressive regime installed and/or supported by the US, would likely develop a hatred and perhaps a fanaticism, and maybe even a desire never to be in a position where the US can carry on doing things to it that it has in the past.
When has Iran or Iraq ever had the means to threaten the US directly ?
Yet the US has invaded one, based upon homespun lies, and now threatens the other, based upon unconfirmed information.
One of the main priorities of the US when it invade Iraq was to secure the oilfields, and not, as you might expect, secure a whole host of sites that had been previously listed as being suspected of forming part of Iraq WMD infrastructure.
Its hardly surprising that Iran reacts in the way it does, it has faced the threat of invasion throught the proxy use of Iraq.
Now try to fit Alberta into that little story if you can, and you might just decide to leave such a stupid analogy alone, and concentrate on the real issue rather than compare and contrast with another situation so differant as to be utterly meaningless.
Good.
Sleep well. Sleep soundly. Sleep with the lights off. 
Why has not the US done these things to Alberta? Is it because there is no reason to do so? Why is there a reason in Iraq and Iran?
How about those regimes in the ME that have not been installed by the US? Paragons of democratic virtue are they? No, it is the culture of the ME that installs and keeps in power the types of governments that exist there. That they blame the US for this is blindness on their part.
Then why is the US there? Oil? Alberta has more oil than Iraq and Iran. I still don’t see US troops here, though.
Unconfirmed? I thought it was well known that the Iranian President wants to wipe Israel off the map. How is that unconfirmed? You tell me you will destroy me why should I sit around and wait for you to do it?
Then why haven’t the US invaded Alberta yet? If it is just about oil as you claim?
The threat of invasion from the US. Then why do they keep yapping about Israel? Has Israel said they will wipe Iran off the map? Not that I know of. The only ones talking crazy is the government in Iran.
What is meaningless is that you say this is about oil and yet Alberta has more oil than both of them. Yet, there is no invasion here. So, why is there an invasion in Iraq and potentially Iran? You say the situations are different. Why are they? What benefit is there to the US to install its own puppet government in either of these places when whoever is in power in these countries is going to sell oil to the highest bidder in any case?