FULL STORY

I thought that was a very disturbing article. It seems it is being taken very seriously, as another article published today states that the US military hopes to have 20,000 uniformed members within the country for a domestic crisis, specifically mentioning a nuclear attack.

If such a tragedy happens, I hope it would bring the world to a significantly more aggressive, and united front, on actually crushing terrorism. Your thoughts?

__________________

I completely agree.

People don't understand that terrorism is alive and well, they're just disillusioned by the fantastic American lifestyles they've become accustomed to. People want the world to be a perfect place, so they think by spreading "peace" and "love" that the world will just follow par and everyone will be happy and all the hate will just disappear, and that's thinking in a false reality. There are people on the other side of the globe that hate Americans because we have the freedom to walk outside and take a breath of fresh air without being afraid, or have the opportunity to do whatever we want with our lives.

I have several friends in the Military and Air Force, a couple of which are in Iraq as we speak. They all tell me the same thing: there are terrorist attacks that are prepared to attack America pretty much every single day, Military and other US Forces just happen to intercept all of them because of our technology and intelligence.

People want to leave Iraq because they think we're just pissing them off, but the fact is they're pissed off whether we're there or not. As soon as we let down our stranglehold on their country, they'll attack us again.

The world is not a peaceful, loving place, and I can tell you right now, America is NOT the bad guy.

From a religious view point...

This doesn't sound good...

__________________

I wonder how many of us here on TN will perish. It'll be strange for the survivors to only see a fraction of the people, even if they've never met them.

Doesn't everyone know that the world is going to end on 12/21/2012? Enjoy these last four years people.

__________________

^That's the stupidest thing I've EVER heard....

__________________

Just remember this...

Some friendly anti-terrorism protection tips... : Hierarchy's Darkside

__________________
ThrillNetwork Webmaster/Systems Administrator -- My Official Fansite -- Get Firefox!
Everytime I ride a coaster, it valleys. I've never been on a stalled coaster or had one roll back (except Wicked Twister and what was Superman: Ultimate Escape, which does that by design).

Can we get rid of those Pirates while were at it?

__________________
Thornton to Heatley all day, every day.

That couldn't have been better said and I completely agree. The faster the idealists (*cough* United Nations *cough*) realize the world isn't all flowers and lollipops out in the third world, the faster we'll actually manage to get something done. It is sad that it usually takes a catastrophe to get them back to reality.

__________________

Exactly my point. It's ridiculous to predict that a catastrophic event will happen in a certain time frame.

__________________

Maybe the US should mind its own business while we fix our problems at home...

Oh, I forgot, our government cares more about other nations before its own.

Relief aid to tsunami victims: Hours
Relief aid to NEW ORLEANS: SIX DAYS.

Of course, we also can't do this because all of the OTHER developed nations may get mad at us for not doing anything for everyone else while they remain on their arse doing nothing productive.

-stares at France and Germany in particular-

That's because its politically correct to . GOD FORBID we not be completely politically correct and unoffensive to other countries. A third world country that has no say in world matters might get mad!

__________________

As I recall, the "experts" also said we would be attacked again after 9/11.

__________________

Intimidator Coming in 2010 to Carowinds!

^Historians also have agreed that in the future there will be a WWIII, involving China and Nuclear weapons. Maybe it's all coming into play here.

Coasterman and El Barto, I'm glad you guys said it.

As for Magnum89, and anybody else interested in the wold coming to an end in 2012, those Mayan calendars don't exactly predict the end of the world, but rather the end of the world as we know it. That could mean the end of the world, or it could be a totally new era for humans living in a way which they never have before. Also, because it is all based on translation, it might not be the whole world, it could just be the land that they occupied, or maybe just the Western Hemisphere.

^Yeah, I know all that, I was being sarcastic. People keep making these catastrophic predictions, and many people take it too seriously and go way overboard, as many have with the Mayan prophecy. Not that terrorism isn't serious, but it happens when it happens, you can't set a specific time for it (unless you're the terrorists).

By the way, who's "Magnum89"?

__________________

And thanks to our wonderful military we haven't been. Which is why I have no problem dumping billions of dollars in it to keep us safe; but to help big businesses and car companies that can't keep their asses afloat? No way.

Keep in mind how the "experts" worded that phrase, 2013 is technically after 9/11/2001...yeah, they're experts at something (keeping their asses away from liability).

I'm not saying there's going to be an attack, because to predict one in my opinion is pretty, how should I call it...ludicrous?

In my opinion, if the world's going to end, its going to be a humanity issue, not an arms battle. Some important, vital ingredient to our human survival is going to go extinct and we'll all be screwed.

I am really torn on this issue.

On one hand, I firmly believe that the middle east is controlling our country by keeping us in constant fear, and it's all BS.

But on the other hand, I firmly belive that if Obama's main platform is to pull us out when he becomes president, then we could seriously be open for another, maybe several other attacks.

Now I just have to figure out which one I belive more.

__________________
HANNAH MONTANA!!!!!!!!!
TAKING THE WORLD BY STORM!!!!!
"I'm living proof....THAT GIRLS CAN ROCK!!!!!!"

Yeah, well, I take everything that comes from unnamed "experts" with a huge grain of salt.

Back in May, when gas hit $4.00/gallon "they" were saying it would be 5 or 6 dollars a gallon by Christmas. I paid 1.36 yesterday, and saw 1.34 today.

__________________
ThrillNetwork Lead Moderator
My neighbor got a big new house, and all I got was his lousy payments

I think you are mixing up the Iraq War and national security. Two different beasts. We went into Iraq because we thought that they had Weapons of Mass Destruction (which the UN searched extensively for and did not find) and because we believed that Saddam Hussein had connections with Al-Qaeda (these were never found either). To say that you are happy to be spilling billions of dollars in a war because it is keeping us safe at home is erroneous. We've made little progress in finding bin Laden or top Al-Qaeda leaders, and now we're stuck in a war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This war is not keeping us any more safe than we were prior to 9/11. Our system for notifying people about a possible, looming terrorist attack is based on a series of colors. It's ridiculous. They place a few soldiers with rifles in airports and sometimes subway stations in NYC, but I haven't seen security heighten at all. Except for the ridiculous things they make you go through to get on a plane.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing by Al-Qaeda killed a few people, but was ultimately unsuccessful. These attacks don't take a few months to prepare, they take years. And eight years later 9/11 occurs. 7 years later now, it seems as if we could be due for another attack.

Bill Clinton:
- Inaugurated January, 1993
- WTC bombing: February, 1993

George W. Bush
- Inaugurated September, 2001
- 9/11: September, 2001

Barack Obama
- Inaugurated January, 2009
- ?

They are just following patterns...

EDIT: For clarification, what I'm trying to say is that early on in both Clinton and Bush's terms in office we have been attacked.

Not likely...at least in the near future...

- Water? Africa and remote parts of Asia already have this issue.
- Sunlight? Maybe during a nuclear winter...but we'd all be dead from the nukes anyway.

__________________

New York Yankees - 2009 WORLD SERIES CHAMPS!

Inauguration Day has been in Janaury since 1937, and will be in 2009. The only exceptions are 1945(Roosevelt died, Truman becomes president from V.P.(elected in following election) 1963(Kennedy dies, Johnson becomes president), and 1974(Nixon resigns, Ford becomes president).

__________________
2005-2006 Season: Carowinds Rides - Hurler/Drop Zone
2007 Season: Emerald Pointe Grounds - Sweep/Breaker

No way! (sarcasm)

Of course I know that inaugurations are almost always held in January. You have missed the point I am making...

I'm saying that early in both Clinton and Bush's terms we were attacked.

__________________

New York Yankees - 2009 WORLD SERIES CHAMPS!

I don't think I'm mixing up anything.

I think you're mixing up the words you want to see, with the words I actually said. You even quoted me and can't get it right.

I don't see anywhere that I referred to a war?

The military is, in fact, involved in issues of national security. But if you feel so adamant about lecturing the planet, yet again, of your undying beliefs of how the planet "should be," I would suggest removing that "inauguration conspiracy" agenda from your repertoire.

It makes it awfully hard to take you seriously.