Realistic preparations for US Isis attack

@parados,

We have trouble controlling the standard crime. We have a problem with the agencies and departments which supply intel. It requires a war or at least the threat in order to justify their entrance. Are you sure you are willing to do (have the government do) what it would takes to provide the security you seek? The security will require the loss of some freedoms and may make travel and communications as a start.
We lack the necessary honesty to cure the problem, and when I say we I am referring to all sides. We had little if any when the Mayflower sailed west from England in 1621 and have gone downhill since. All creditability disappears when you decided that the end justifies the means. You can't have the freedoms you want to protect without removing them. As a nation we must cure our internal problems before we can begin to have an effect on external problems.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Security at airports, piers, and borders were strengthened after 9/11. What world do you live in? Do you ever travel by these modes of transportation? Probably not, because they now have security lines with TSA agents who even look at little old me with my passport over a half inch thick with stamps from all around the world. At many airports, I have to take off my shoes, belts, and wristwatch - with nothing in my pockets. They even xray every passenger and carryon luggage that goes through security.

You are totally ignorant of the realities of today's border security at all countries. No passport, no VISA, no passenger.

Give it a try; try to get on a plane without a passport to the Middle East.

Your argument rests on the ludicrous idea that ISIS cannot in any way find a person who can pass a background check, nor contact a sympathizer already in the US.

ISIS may be friendly with other groups with similar aims who can get a person in or knows a person already inside. They may save new recruits who aren't yet on the law enforcement radar for this type of use. You are asserting that no matter how many sympathetic groups they know, no matter how much money they're willing to spend, no matter how many international sympathizers they know, they cannot contrive to find a single person who can get in or already is in the US. Frankly, it's unbelievable. International authorities cannot identify every person in the world who has sympathies with radical Islam. Are you aware that law enforcement actually does, from time to time, foil bombing attempts in the US by radical Muslims?

So then, doing more in Syria and Iraq, like sending troops and expanding air strikes into Syria as the right-wingers suggest--would mitigate the threat from every person in the world who has sympathies with radical Islam?

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Brandon said,

Quote:

Your argument rests on the ludicrous idea that ISIS cannot in any way find a person who can pass a background check, nor contact a sympathizer already in the US.

No. Those are your words, created out of abnormal fear of the unknown. We already have Americans who kill Americans at a much higher rate than from terrorists. Car accidents kill more Americans than the fear you seem to have about terrorists in our country. Look at the facts - if that's at all possible. Your fears are not only based on ignorance of reality, but it's abnormal.

3 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Listen, I agree about fear mongering and I like most of the country are sick and tired of wars, I imagine those we are fighting are sick of them too. (Talking about everyday local people who live in the war zones.)

However, I don't imagine the threat against terrorism is as slight as you think. We really do not know what has been prevented. Most of all, it only takes one successful attack as we saw on 9/11. These are the reasons are why I support surveillance and working with our allies and diplomacy over wars as a first, last and middle resort. But I don't think we can just ignore the threat of terrorism because it is more common for Americans to die by car accidents or gun violence or whatever.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Those are not the real issues. We have intelligence and our many departments looking at terrorist activities that's humanly possible. Are they 100% protections? Of coarse not!

However, the reality is that terrorist attacks on Americans are small compared to how Americans die every day from other normal human activities. Driving ones car is more dangerous than flying in commercial aircraft. Do we have airplane crashes? Yes, but that's an accepted part of living in this world of today.

It seems FEAR is the predominant rhetoric on these boards from terrorism.

Try living in the real world. Statistically speaking, other than war zones, everyplace else is pretty safe. Even in the US, some cities are more dangerous than others. Those are facts no matter what city governments do to minimize them.

I have more fear walking at night in Oakland, California, than I do traveling to Israel.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I'll be in NYC next month, and found this. It means I'll feel safe walking at night in the city.

Quote:

Many people ask me if New York City is dangerous or scary. Having lived here for many years, I'm constantly surprised at the number of people who have a perception of New York City as dangerous and crime ridden. A lot of this has to do with the depiction of New York City from the 1970s in movies like Taxi Driver and in television shows, like NYPD Blue and Law & Order.

Despite having a population of more than 8 million people, New York City consistently ranks in the top ten safest large cities (cities with more than 500,000 people) in the United States. Violent crimes in New York City have dropped by over 50% in the last decade and the FBI reports that murder rates in 2009 were the lowest since 1963, when records were first kept. However, visitors should be aware that many swindlers and thieves are skilled at identifying "out of towners" and folks that may seem disoriented or confused to prey upon. While this shouldn't scare you away from New York City, using common sense should keep you fairly safe.

I enjoy walking at night in big cities, because the atmosphere changes like magic with all the lights and people enjoying the night life of the city. There's more laughter, music, and great restaurants filled with people who are enjoying the ambiance. I like that!

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

If attending a driving school would reduce provide us with better drivers. I would be in favor of requiring attendance at a certified shooting school which would allow you to purchase a cal and type gun and barrel length. The brain of people goes into slow mode when the ignition switch is turned on. Multi tasking begins and drive has the lowest priority. I am usually at, if not slightly over the left lane marker and attempt to see the brake lights 5 cars ahead. I avoid the middle lanes as there is the possibility that there is no escape route.
I don't mind taking to the grass or the thought of scrubbing off 40 or 50 mph on concrete or Armco. A gun provides a similar thought process.

Realistic preparations for US Isis attack. Realistic preparation can be handled before or after an event. For before reduce all air travel by a minimum of 50%. Replace all major cities with smaller ones having a reduced population and have them walled with limited easy access. All access points will be check points. If you want security it is going to cost you dearly. There is a chance of securing the border with Mexico. Less of a chance for the border with Canada which makes that the best place for terrorists to enter by land. Enter by water sets up a completely different set of conditions. How about a 1 mile wide zone between the oceans and where people are allowed. I just described something that is less than 100% effective and have not mentioned the power grid, water supplies etc.
How secure would you like to make our borders? A locked house only keeps out honest people.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

But I don't think we can just ignore the threat of terrorism because it is more common for Americans to die by car accidents or gun violence or whatever.

But our government has been spying on the people that want to cause damage to our government as Snowden and Greenwald pointed out to the rest of the world and by the way the terroists who you all fear. Who are you more afraid of? Our government or terroists? Personally I dont think our government is going to do that much damage to our freedoms as long as we pay close attention to our government. All we have to do is vote congressmen into office who have our interest in mind. I sure as hell wish that we had some I could trust where I live and I wish I could convince the 50% of citizens who dont vote to do so. I wonder what percentage of citizens who are screaming about our freedom voted in the last 2 elections?

1 Reply

@G4Racer,

Driving and terrorism are completely different issues.

Terrorism attacks by anyone or any group are being investigated by our government. I doubt very much there's much more they can do to improve our protections. How much more money do you wish to invest into more policing? I'd rather see that money spent on infrastructure maintenance and development. In California, we have a huge shortage of fresh water. I want to see more spending on developing more water storage and transportation of this limited resource over spending more on looking for terrorists. All forms of infrastructure needs upkeep and building to keep up with the increase in our population.

It's called common sense balance of our government resources.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Quote:
But I don't think we can just ignore the threat of terrorism because it is more common for Americans to die by car accidents or gun violence or whatever.

But our government has been spying on the people that want to cause damage to our government as Snowden and Greenwald pointed out to the rest of the world and by the way the terroists who you all fear. Who are you more afraid of? Our government or terroists? Personally I dont think our government is going to do that much damage to our freedoms as long as we pay close attention to our government. All we have to do is vote congressmen into office who have our interest in mind. I sure as hell wish that we had some I could trust where I live and I wish I could convince the 50% of citizens who dont vote to do so. I wonder what percentage of citizens who are screaming about our freedom voted in the last 2 elections?

Rabel, the weird thing is I suspect MOST of them have our interests in mind...and MOST will back legislation that will benefit us to the best of their ability...

...so long as doing so does not conflict with doing what is in their own best interests...and that of their families.

That, it seem to me, is the reality of politics...especially in this country.

They want to do what is right for the people and for the country...and they want to do what is right for themselves and their families.

Almost to a person, they resolve conflicts between the two in favor of doing what is in their self-interests...and in the interests of their family's well-being.

Hell of a dynamic there.

And since doing what is in one's self-interest (and in the interests of one's family) is so firmly ingrained in just about everyone...where are you going to find the people you suggest should be elected...those people who "have our interests in mind"...rather than their own?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Good question. Got any good answers? I have several solutions that arnt worth going into because even though it would be good for the country it would be detrimental to the careers of the politicians so we can just put my solutions aside. The only way I see is to go to citizens initiatives, which will never happen due to citizen apathy.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Maybe, except for the holocaust. The Zionists comes in an easy second place.
In the 21st century, the Zionists probably comes close to being number one in killing their own countrymen - under the auspices of the US.

Yet another utterly ridiculous post from CI the anti-Semite.

I'm not even sure what assertion your incoherent first paragraph is intended to relay to us. "The Zionists" come in second place to the Nazis?

If you lay at their feet every single death (including those of Jews) that can, in anyway, be connected to Jews establishing a new Israel as a modern homeland, "The Zionists" would be responsible for ending the lives of at the very most, 150,000 people. Not an insignificant number, until you put it in perspective. These lives have been lost over a period of 154 years, while far, far greater numbers have been killed over much shorter periods. Periods of only a few years, and even a few months.

How long do you think it took the Nazis to kill 6 Million Jews? How about King Leopold's killing of 8 Million Congolese? Do you think it took Stalin over a century and a half to kill 20 Million Russians, Ukrainians, Mongols and other Western Asian peoples?

In less than 30 years, Mao Zedong was responsible for 40 Million deaths.(Some estimates put the count as high as 78 million) In 4 years, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were responsible for the deaths of 2 Million people or 25% of the population of Cambodia. In 1 year, the Turks killed 1.2 Million Armenians. In a little more than 3 months, between 500,000 and 1 Million Rwandans were killed

As for your second, clearer, assertion that "The Zionists" "come close" to being #1, in the 21st Century, in "killing their own countrymen," it is equally absurd.

Since 2000, 1,266 Israelis have been killed

Since 2011, approx 120,000 Syrians (the lowest estimate) have been killed by Bashar al-Assad.

Since 2003, approx 200,000 South Sudanese have been killed by their government, with 15,000 deaths since 2013

Since 2006, approx 150,000 Mexicans have died in that country's drug war.

Assuming that you wish to consider that the Palestinians are also the "countrymen" of "The Zionists," adding their deaths to the count since 2000 raises it to 10,082. Close to "first place?"

On this, as well as many other topics, you are a fool. I would call you an ignorant fool, but I have already laid out most of these statistics for you in another thread and so you can't even plead ignorance.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Yes, the second place to the Nazis. Even in South Africa, under apartheid, they did not kill the blacks like they did under Nazism or the Zionism of their own countrymen. It's not about the length of time. It's about genocide. You probably fail to understand the definition.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Good question. Got any good answers? I have several solutions that arnt worth going into because even though it would be good for the country it would be detrimental to the careers of the politicians so we can just put my solutions aside. The only way I see is to go to citizens initiatives, which will never happen due to citizen apathy.

I cannot conceive of any currently workable solution that will eliminate the "I will look after the interests of myself and my family before the general interests", Rabel.

I honestly cannot.

If you can...bring them up for discussion. I'd love to hear some notions that could lead to a solution.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
Are you aware that law enforcement actually does, from time to time, foil bombing attempts in the US by radical Muslims?

It seems you are unaware of that fact.

The fact that this has happened periodically absolutely demonstrates that people who wish to plant bombs cannot always be kept out of the US. It does not demonstrate that law enforcement will always catch all of them.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Security at airports, piers, and borders were strengthened after 9/11. What world do you live in? Do you ever travel by these modes of transportation? Probably not, because they now have security lines with TSA agents who even look at little old me with my passport over a half inch thick with stamps from all around the world. At many airports, I have to take off my shoes, belts, and wristwatch - with nothing in my pockets. They even xray every passenger and carryon luggage that goes through security.

You are totally ignorant of the realities of today's border security at all countries. No passport, no VISA, no passenger.

Give it a try; try to get on a plane without a passport to the Middle East.

Your argument rests on the ludicrous idea that ISIS cannot in any way find a person who can pass a background check, nor contact a sympathizer already in the US.

ISIS may be friendly with other groups with similar aims who can get a person in or knows a person already inside. They may save new recruits who aren't yet on the law enforcement radar for this type of use. You are asserting that no matter how many sympathetic groups they know, no matter how much money they're willing to spend, no matter how many international sympathizers they know, they cannot contrive to find a single person who can get in or already is in the US. Frankly, it's unbelievable. International authorities cannot identify every person in the world who has sympathies with radical Islam. Are you aware that law enforcement actually does, from time to time, foil bombing attempts in the US by radical Muslims?

So then, doing more in Syria and Iraq, like sending troops and expanding air strikes into Syria as the right-wingers suggest--would mitigate the threat from every person in the world who has sympathies with radical Islam?

At this point, my argument is simply that there is a real danger to which we ought to try to find a solution.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Brandon said,
Quote:
Your argument rests on the ludicrous idea that ISIS cannot in any way find a person who can pass a background check, nor contact a sympathizer already in the US.

No. Those are your words, created out of abnormal fear of the unknown. We already have Americans who kill Americans at a much higher rate than from terrorists. Car accidents kill more Americans than the fear you seem to have about terrorists in our country. Look at the facts - if that's at all possible. Your fears are not only based on ignorance of reality, but it's abnormal.

How, may I ask, does the fact that lots of people die in automobile accidents alter the fact that Islamic terrorists such as ISIS could do what Al Qaeda did and attack public places in America? You have been maintaining it's an unrealistic fear not even worth addressing because ISIS simply couldn't get anyone into the US to do something like this and I have shown that they could. Surely it is easier to place a bomb in a mall or movie theater than to train people to kidnap planes and fly them into buildings. Your position is that we should take no measures to address it until people are dead?

1 Reply

@G4Racer,

What are you going on about? I didn't say anything you seem to be claiming I said.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

parados wrote:

Quote:
Are you aware that law enforcement actually does, from time to time, foil bombing attempts in the US by radical Muslims?

It seems you are unaware of that fact.

The fact that this has happened periodically absolutely demonstrates that people who wish to plant bombs cannot always be kept out of the US. It does not demonstrate that law enforcement will always catch all of them.

Who said law enforcement will always catch them?
Can there be a small scale bombing? Yes. Can ISIS mount a concerted attack by sending fighters to the US to do so? Not likely because the logistics would make it unlikely with our current security.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

At this point, my argument is simply that there is a real danger to which we ought to try to find a solution.

The biggest threat we have is not from people associated with ISIS or any other terrorist group. Those groups are monitored. The threat comes from lone people that are sympathetic and intelligent enough to create the threat without communicating with anyone about it.

2 Replies

Realistic preparations for US Isis attack

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know