Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: Mystic
This is the last time I will attempt to explain the difference between a terrorist organization and ordinary murderers, cults, etc.
Not so many years ago 19 terrorists were able to murder almost 3000 people in the USA and cause probably in excess of a trillion dollars worth of damage. Sure, some weird cult could potentially do the same. As was pointed out a cult in Japan attempted to kill a large number of people using poison gas. Although that cult with its resources and number of members could probably be considered for all practical purposes a terrorist organization.
There are different kinds of terrorists. A lone wolf terrorist might be able to kill only a few people. When the leading nation state that supports terrorism obtains nuclear weapons far larger numbers of people could potentially be killed. Maybe at that point some people here might be able to understand the difference between terrorist organizations and serial killers or cults.
It is unlikely that a serial murderer or even a cult would be able to obtain nuclear weapons. But nuclear weapons could potentially be supplied to a terrorist organization.
Very recently 15 individuals were arrested by some 800 police in Australia. Those individuals were apparently going to behead people on the streets and put the videos on social media and the internet. There has already been a public beheading of a British soldier in England which was video recorded.
If some people here are unable to understand the danger terrorist organizations represent to countries like the USA, Canada, etc., than this is as far as I am going to go to try to explain the danger. As long as the people who have to deal with the terrorist organizations understand what is going on that is all that matters. Some people at an internet website arguing over the difference between serial killers, cults, and terrorist organizations is not important.
Thanks for the history lesson and straw man arguments I never made or said, but I'm pretty well versed in the subject.
Terrorists do what they do because they want obsessive fear mongering and pants-wetting. Yes, 19 hijackers did do enormous damage largely because the feds and the dolt in the Oval Office were largely asleep at the wheel despite, in the paraphrased words of the
9/11 Commissions (which I've cover to cover), the "lights were blinking red" in the summer of 2001.
Terrorism is largely a law enforcement problem domestically and yes, ISIS is a concern. But of course, they want you to be obsessively fearful of an organization that controls mostly the [censored] parts of the Middle East in the impoverished Sunni parts of Iraq and Syria. They were allowed to do so by an ineffectual and corrupt Iraqi gov't and their cache of U.S. arms that were never fired and only dropped once...
ISIS is like al Qaida of Iraq: an effectively self-destructing organization that alienates everyone and has even made us strange bedfellows with Iran. Soon, the Baathist (secular, pan-Arab Nationalists) will get sick of their revisionist medieval tyranny and cut their throats...
There is a lot of blame to go around.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bill-clinton-sept-10-2001-i-could-have-gotten-bin-laden
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/24/clinton.binladen/
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/clinton-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/sep/1/20030901-102359-9067r/?page=all
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/attack/2001/11/12/clinton-usatcov.htm
http://books.google.com/books?id=38Q6p6V...ubl&f=false
Plenty of blame to go around maybe our elected leader can go and tell the world that ISIS is the Jay Vee team wearing Lakers Jerseys and are not Kobe Bryant.
There maybe plenty of blame to go around, including the same congressmen that mocked Clinton for "wagging the dog"...
Our current president has gotten Bin Laden and has used drones and other methods to kill / capture many other terrorist leaders in several countries. In the meantime, countless military personnel have been brought back out of harms way which also reduces direct military spending as well as all that taxpayer money that went to "contractors" or disappeared during the Bush years.
The people of Libya overthrew Qaddafi and Middle Eastern countries are finally stepping up to fight extremism in their backyard rather than getting young Americans to risk their lives. This is the way it should be. Why is it up to America to give the lives of it's young people and spend huge amounts of our money for the benefit of the MIC and Middle Eastern countries that are largely causing their own problems?
