[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train]
This whole “we’re fighting World War III/we must infringe upon your civil rights/the ends justify the means” meme …
[/QUOTE]
I don’t agree with the 2nd and 3rd pieces of that trifecta. I only wanted to register my opinion that the first makes some reasonable sense to me.
[QUOTE=Terrifel]
Four attacks over thirteen years seems like a pretty relaxed World War.
[/QUOTE]
Well the embassy bombings encompassed 3 separate attacks, and there were 4 on 9/11. There have also been major events in London and Spain and Bali, plus unknown numbers of thwarted attempts.
More to the point, the perceived pace is a cultural difference that will favor AQ precisely because we will ‘relax’ and be caught off-guard again.
[QUOTE=Key Lime Guy]
It doesn’t look like WWII, but I agree with the premise in abstract: we have been engaged by a geographically-diverse coalition of enemies, who have attacked us on several fronts.
(which is not to say we’ve done anything right in Iraq)
[/QUOTE]
WTF? “geographically-diverse coalition of enemies”
You know what? Instead of wasting time with this nonsense and calling you all of sorts of crap, just read some of the other, more moderate posts.
And don’t be such an ignorant MF. Not a single fuckin’ nation has attacked – or even threaten as much – the US. You, OTOH, have invaded two. One for no reason at all – might as well have been Bolivia instead. And while I initially supported the Afghanistan invasion, had I known how incredibly incompetent the people currently in charge of US foreign affairs are, I would have opposed that one as well.
Dumbass.
[QUOTE=Key Lime Guy]
More to the point, the perceived pace is a cultural difference that will favor AQ precisely because we will ‘relax’ and be caught off-guard again.
[/QUOTE]
Good point. I’ll begin panicking immediately.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
I’m not so sure about the geographically diverse thing. It’s a couple of factions in a small part of a perpetually volatile region. It’s almost like calling two guys fighting in a bar on New Year’s eve a riot.
[/QUOTE]
And then sending two carrier groups to stop them.
[QUOTE=Key Lime Guy]
Well the embassy bombings encompassed 3 separate attacks, and there were 4 on 9/11. There have also been major events in London and Spain and Bali, plus unknown numbers of thwarted attempts.
More to the point, the perceived pace is a cultural difference that will favor AQ precisely because we will ‘relax’ and be caught off-guard again.
[/QUOTE]
'Relax"? You call butchering countless hundreds of thousands “relaxing.”?
Actually, what you’ve done is to unite the majority of the world against you. Mostly politically – but obviously the “extremists” won’t be lacking for recruits either. Hell, had you blown away my family I might be right there with them.
It’s called “empathy.” Look it up.
I for one, take Senator Graham at his word. I will start planting my victory garden in the morning.
[QUOTE=crowmanyclouds]
Yeah, keep mocking those yellow ribbons.
When the Prez gives us the order to throw them up into the air, and our magnetic yellow ribbon bubble shield is deployed, I think ya all will be singing a different tune!
Fuckers just can’t get anything right!
CMC fnord!
[/QUOTE]
I always liked this ribbon/bumpersticker. Kinda wordy tho…
[QUOTE=Key Lime Guy]
What I had in mind was that the people who have attacked us have been Pakastani, Egyptian, Saudi, Lebanese, Yemeni, Kenyan & Sudanese (for starters). I’m thinking of WTC 1993, USS Cole, 1998 Embassy bombings, and 9/11.
[/QUOTE]
Timothy McVeigh was American (or Irish-American I guess…) Does that mean we should start attacking parts of the U.S. and Ireland too? Does every citizen of a country speak for that country? :dubious:
[QUOTE=Key Lime Guy]
Well the embassy bombings encompassed 3 separate attacks, and there were 4 on 9/11. There have also been major events in London and Spain and Bali, plus unknown numbers of thwarted attempts.
More to the point, the perceived pace is a cultural difference that will favor AQ precisely because we will ‘relax’ and be caught off-guard again.
[/QUOTE]
I think the U.S. gov is on point… on every possible threat they can think of. But if the mods would allow it, I’ll bet Dopers could come up with a hundred plans that they haven’t thought of.
We aren’t relaxed at all. You can’t even cross the fucking Canadian border without a passport. And if you had a DUI 20 years ago, you can’t cross at all. You need a passport to enter the fucking Bahamas! Security is as tight as it has ever been. Still, the gov can’t think of every scenario from someone bent on sidetracking it.
[QUOTE=if6was9]
I think the U.S. gov is on point… on every possible threat they can think of…
[/QUOTE]
Chemical plants? Ports?
I’ve often heard the Cold War referred to as World War III, which would make this one World War IV.
But then, I know of one historian who claims World War I was actually in the mid-18th century. It was only the French and British, but they fought each other all over the world – in the New World (French and Indian War), India, Africa, Europe, the high seas.
[QUOTE=Squink]
Chemical plants? Ports?
[/QUOTE]
This is what I’m saying. They already have obvious holes, because of funding or not seeing a threat. But even their best efforts, Al Q is thinking thinking thinking, every day, about every little nuance they can think of. They can be as diligent as any nation, ever, and they still can’t plug every hole.
[QUOTE=if6was9]
They can be as diligent as any nation, ever, and they still can’t plug every hole.
[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, if al Q is clever, we’re DOOMED.
[QUOTE=Squink]
Oh yeah, if al Q is clever, we’re DOOMED.
[/QUOTE]
This is getting into hijack territory… but WTF are you going on about? Flying fully-fueled planes into the WTC and bringing them down was pretty fucking clever. Are you saying they’re idiots? Or are you just being contrary?
[QUOTE=if6was9]
This is what I’m saying. They already have obvious holes, because of funding or not seeing a threat. But even their best efforts, Al Q is thinking thinking thinking, every day, about every little nuance they can think of. They can be as diligent as any nation, ever, and they still can’t plug every hole.
[/QUOTE]
Good point. We should pre-emptively invade every country with a greater than zero probability of Al Q members in it. Just to make sure, you know.
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=BMax]
Good point. We should pre-emptively invade every country with a greater than zero probability of Al Q members in it. Just to make sure, you know.
:rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
This is not what I was saying at all. I was refuting Key Lime’s simplistic view that hijacker x, y, z, and a1 was from country x. So ALL of country x is suspect. And then Squink starts inferring that there are major holes Al Q doesn’t see, and that they’re idiots. At least that is how I read his comments. If this is not his style or politics, well, excuse me for not knowing every posters politics and posting history. Maybe a little writing clarity would help.
:rolleyes: yourself
[QUOTE=if6was9]
Or are you just being contrary?
[/QUOTE]
No, apparently I’m agreeing with you, but your earlier post didn’t make clear to me what your position was.
Al Qaeda has obviously shown itself to have some clever operatives. If we’re to really make a dent in them, we need to figure a way of drying up its stream of gifted recruits. Barriers alone cannot secure us.
[QUOTE=Squink]
No, apparently I’m agreeing with you, but your earlier post didn’t make clear to me what your position was.
Al Qaeda has obviously shown itself to have some clever operatives. If we’re to really make a dent in them, we need to figure a way of drying up its stream of gifted recruits. Barriers alone cannot secure us.
[/QUOTE]
It’s cool. And yes, I think closing the borders to the BAHAMAS is a major jerk-off session. Stoping recruits is the answer. I’m of the opinion that our continued prescence in Iraq is a major recruiting drive. 
Our prescence there is an affront to their religion. I must admit, I don’t completely understand it, but I certainly see it. Just us being there brings people out of the woodwork, ready to die for the cause. And what is Bush’s, and Graham’s response? BRING IN MORE TROOPS! It’s just banging their heads against the wall to me.
[QUOTE=if6was9]
I was refuting Key Lime’s simplistic view that hijacker x, y, z, and a1 was from country x. So ALL of country x is suspect.
[/QUOTE]
I never said ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY LIKE THAT. If you’d read the thread you’d see that my assertion that the enemy is ‘geographically-diverse’ (hence “world war”) was called into question, and that was my rebuttal.
ALL of country x is not suspect - I never even came close to implying that.
