How and When?

[shira]

Some conservative commentators argue that the fact there hasn't been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 is proof that George Bush's anti-terrorism policies are working. But most people agree that it's only a matter of time before the U.S. suffers another attack. So here are the questions:

How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

 

[dahunan]

Don't piss off Cheney

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: shira
How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

Depends if Iran is allowed to continue with its nuclear ambitions. Rumor is the Democrats are working closely with the UN to create a strongly worded document, so I'm sure Iran will cease and desist very soon.

Major coastal city. I'd guess on the Eastern seaboard as that area has multipurpose targets. (Financial, Political, Strategic etc)

Depends on the type of attack, but I'd bet its gonna be a whole hell of a lot.

The other option is a small scale attack for maximum impact for its size, much like the Beslan school incident. Again though that would be met with a strongly worded document, so I for one feel completely safe. I dont think we'll see any attacks anytime soon.

 

[dahunan]

They will not attack until they achieve their goal of getting us out of Iraq first.

Then they can attack again.. The attack on Iraq is what they wanted..

What will they achieve with another attack on the US?

 

[j00fek]

ask the republicans they should know

 

[glugglug]

<half sarcastic>
Once the corrupt majority in Congress are ousted in January, they won't have enough votes to approve another attack.
</half sarcastic>

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: glugglug
<half sarcastic>
Once the corrupt majority in Congress are ousted in January, they won't have enough votes to approve another attack.
</half sarcastic>

lol

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: BigToque

Originally posted by: glugglug
<half sarcastic>
Once the corrupt majority in Congress are ousted in January, they won't have enough votes to approve another attack.
</half sarcastic>

lol

 

[bamacre]

There is no doubt the US will be attacked with a nuclear weapon within the next 10 years or so.

Just hope you do not live in whatever city they decide to set it off. Of course, foreseeing what life will be like in the US afterwards, maybe one would be better off in said city anyway.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: shira
Some conservative commentators argue that the fact there hasn't been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 is proof that George Bush's anti-terrorism policies are working. But most people agree that it's only a matter of time before the U.S. suffers another attack. So here are the questions:

How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

Doesn't matter because it will all be the Democrats fault.

 

[jpeyton]

Maybe it'll open our eyes enough to finish off Osama and al-Qaeda this time.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Let me preface this by saying that there will probably be another attack on the US ragardless of which party is in charge...

But...

What sort of backlash do you see for the Dems if it happens on their watch? The political right in this country will have a field day with that.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: shira
Some conservative commentators argue that the fact there hasn't been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 is proof that George Bush's anti-terrorism policies are working. But most people agree that it's only a matter of time before the U.S. suffers another attack. So here are the questions:

How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

Doesn't matter because it will all be the Democrats fault.

Only if its nuclear.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Depends if Iran is allowed to continue with its nuclear ambitions.

:laugh:

There are easier ways to get a nuclear weapon than waiting for Iran to assemble and test 50,000 centrifuges, perfect its nuclear weapon design, assemble and test its design, and then smuggle one of their precious few nuclear weapons under the world's watchful eye.

Iran is just another Bush administration boogeyman (everyone remembers the Iraq, yellow cake and mushroom clouds speech).

And they will not back down from their legal right to control the fuel cycle.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Let me preface this by saying that there will probably be another attack on the US ragardless of which party is in charge...

But...

What sort of backlash do you see for the Dems if it happens on their watch? The political right in this country will have a field day with that.

What "watch" do you mean? Are the Senators and Representatives part of an FBI task force or something? Their job is to legislate, not kick down doors.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Let me preface this by saying that there will probably be another attack on the US ragardless of which party is in charge...

But...

What sort of backlash do you see for the Dems if it happens on their watch? The political right in this country will have a field day with that.

What "watch" do you mean? Are the Senators and Representatives part of an FBI task force or something? Their job is to legislate, not kick down doors.

i think he means after '08 should a Dem win the Presidency.

I do often wonder who they'd blame if they themselves were at the helm... my guess is that it would still be Bush's fault because Bush makes terrorists in a basement laboratory somewhere in the American southwest. He does, I swear!

 

[GoPackGo]

Any attack on the US while Bush is President would be foolish.

You know he will respond militarily. Its been nearly four years since the invasion of Iraq and I am sure the missles are replenished.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: shira
Some conservative commentators argue that the fact there hasn't been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 is proof that George Bush's anti-terrorism policies are working. But most people agree that it's only a matter of time before the U.S. suffers another attack. So here are the questions:

How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

Doesn't matter because it will all be Clinton's fault.

Fixed that for ya Dave!

 

[TravisT]

I would say that the war in Iraq is keeping many terrorists from being able to organize a more structured plan. We are continuously knocking off high ranking al Qaeda leaders. Do I think that it is stopping a terrorist attack in the future? No. I think it is merely prolonging the inevitable. The question is, would merely playing a defensive game be enough to stop a terrorist attack at all?

 

[ayabe]

THey are going to poison our toiletries, just like the Joker did in Batman(MK version)


"New and improved Joker products!!!"

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TravisT
I would say that the war in Iraq is keeping many terrorists from being able to organize a more structured plan.

You mean, all those new recruits because of the war we started are too many to deal with?

We are continuously knocking off high ranking al Qaeda leaders.

Think we've got the #3 guy 17 times now. It's a flat organization - everyone but bin Laden and his top leader is #3 in Al Queda.

Do I think that it is stopping a terrorist attack in the future? No. I think it is merely prolonging the inevitable. The question is, would merely playing a defensive game be enough to stop a terrorist attack at all?

# of times the right wing has been seen to grasp the concept that our aggressive policies, our 'offense', can *cause* terrorism: 0

 

[MisterDucky]

Originally posted by: shira
Some conservative commentators argue that the fact there hasn't been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 is proof that George Bush's anti-terrorism policies are working.

Keywords here: "on US soil". Change it to "on US soldiers," and the situation isn't so rosy.

But most people agree that it's only a matter of time before the U.S. suffers another attack. So here are the questions:

How will American be attacked?
When (approximately) will the attack occur?
How many Americans will die?

1. I'm guessing by an IED.
2. Probably sometime tommorow.
3. A couple.

It isn't the staggering damage of flying planes into buildings, but a few a day adds up pretty quick.

 

[Schadenfroh]

shira, if that is your real name. You will get no ideas from us.

 

[TravisT]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TravisT
I would say that the war in Iraq is keeping many terrorists from being able to organize a more structured plan.

You mean, all those new recruits because of the war we started are too many to deal with?

We are continuously knocking off high ranking al Qaeda leaders.

Think we've got the #3 guy 17 times now. It's a flat organization - everyone but bin Laden and his top leader is #3 in Al Queda.

Do I think that it is stopping a terrorist attack in the future? No. I think it is merely prolonging the inevitable. The question is, would merely playing a defensive game be enough to stop a terrorist attack at all?

# of times the right wing has been seen to grasp the concept that our aggressive policies, our 'offense', can *cause* terrorism: 0

# of times the left wing has been seen to grasp the concept that having a "defense", can *not stop* terrorism: 0

While I agree that the war isn't stopping terrorism itself, we know from 9/11 that merely sitting on our hands does absolutely nothing to stop it. So whats the solution? Should we not have a proactive approach to fighting terrorism?

 

[Pens1566]

Somehow, it will be blamed on Clinton.

Even though he's not the one thats had several years to implement the findings of the 9/11 commission.