Truthers: Do you like America?

[gumboot]

Peace is nice, but there's always someone out there who thinks they can get what they want if they point a gun at someone. History has plenty of examples of the consequences if nobody decides to stop such behavior.

And I have no doubt the future will contain plenty more examples. Personally I think the nuclear destruction of a western city will be one of those lessons. It's inevitable. I just hope I'm not in it.

-Gumboot

 

[AZCat]

And I have no doubt the future will contain plenty more examples. Personally I think the nuclear destruction of a western city will be one of those lessons. It's inevitable. I just hope I'm not in it.

-Gumboot

I think nuclear weapons are given too much credibility as potential tools of unhappy parties. IMO they are way too expensive to obtain, assemble, maintain and ship compared to alternatives that can be obtained or constructed within the target country. Neither Timothy McVeigh nor the terrorists on September 11th (to name two USA incidents) needed such technically sophisticated weaponry to cause massive damage and terror.

 

[gumboot]

I think nuclear weapons are given too much credibility as potential tools of unhappy parties. IMO they are way too expensive to obtain, assemble, maintain and ship compared to alternatives that can be obtained or constructed within the target country. Neither Timothy McVeigh nor the terrorists on September 11th (to name two USA incidents) needed such technically sophisticated weaponry to cause massive damage and terror.

9/11 and the Oklahoma bombings are pinpricks compared to the damage that could be wrought by a nuclear weapon.

"Unhappy parties" (Love, the term by the way, been to a few of those in my time ) want nuclear weapons. They've wanted them for a while. We already know that. One day they will get hold of one. One advantage of the Cold War was the real threat of nuclear holocaust ensured people kept a much more careful eye on nuclear weapons and material.

Now we have a collapsed USSR, with nuclear weapons scattered across half a dozen countries of variable repute, we have states of questionable intent such as North Korea and Iran potentially developing nuclear weapons, we have countries in highly unstable situations with nuclear weapons (think Israel) we have nations that are increasing hotbeds of Radical Islam with nuclear weapons (Pakistan) and who knows what else is happening on the nuclear front that we are unaware of?

It's a matter of time. It will happen.

-Gumboot

 

[AZCat]

9/11 and the Oklahoma bombings are pinpricks compared to the damage that could be wrought by a nuclear weapon.

"Unhappy parties" (Love, the term by the way, been to a few of those in my time ) want nuclear weapons. They've wanted them for a while. We already know that. One day they will get hold of one. One advantage of the Cold War was the real threat of nuclear holocaust ensured people kept a much more careful eye on nuclear weapons and material.

Now we have a collapsed USSR, with nuclear weapons scattered across half a dozen countries of variable repute, we have states of questionable intent such as North Korea and Iran potentially developing nuclear weapons, we have countries in highly unstable situations with nuclear weapons (think Israel) we have nations that are increasing hotbeds of Radical Islam with nuclear weapons (Pakistan) and who knows what else is happening on the nuclear front that we are unaware of?

It's a matter of time. It will happen.

-Gumboot

Yes they were pinpricks, but the choice of a weapon must take into account the ease with which one may acquire (and use) it as well as the potential damage it can cause. I read "Dark Sun" a few years ago and it contained a photo of one of the later U.S. surface detonation tests of a thermonuclear device overlayed on a photo of Manhattan, N.Y. The effect was horrifying, but too many times have I been out drinking with my buddies when we have brainstormed any number of cheap - yet effective - ways to cripple the U.S. that didn't involve nuclear weapons, to believe that these same ideas have not hatched in the heads of more menacing folk than a gaggle of inebriated engineers (of course, the determination of efficacy of said ideas may have been strongly dependent on the alcohol consumed by our little group).

 

[gumboot]

Yes they were pinpricks, but the choice of a weapon must take into account the ease with which one may acquire (and use) it as well as the potential damage it can cause. I read "Dark Sun" a few years ago and it contained a photo of one of the later U.S. surface detonation tests of a thermonuclear device overlayed on a photo of Manhattan, N.Y. The effect was horrifying, but too many times have I been out drinking with my buddies when we have brainstormed any number of cheap - yet effective - ways to cripple the U.S. that didn't involve nuclear weapons, to believe that these same ideas have not hatched in the heads of more menacing folk than a gaggle of inebriated engineers (of course, the determination of efficacy of said ideas may have been strongly dependent on the alcohol consumed by our little group).

I'm not saying they wouldn't use other methods. Of course they will. I completely agree with everything you said. But I don't think they will ever abandon efforts to gain the ultimate weapon, and I think the current global climate is only making chances of them accquiring a nuclear device much easier.

-Gumboot

 

[AZCat]

I'm not saying they wouldn't use other methods. Of course they will. I completely agree with everything you said. But I don't think they will ever abandon efforts to gain the ultimate weapon, and I think the current global climate is only making chances of them accquiring a nuclear device much easier.

-Gumboot

I agree. IIRC OBL is (or was) pursing possible acquisition of a nuclear weapon. That would be a Very Bad Thing, IMO. Who would be the target? Now that's a thought - imagine OBL struggling to decide which decadent metropolis most deserves annihilation.

 

[Mobyseven]

I agree. IIRC OBL is (or was) pursing possible acquisition of a nuclear weapon. That would be a Very Bad Thing, IMO. Who would be the target? Now that's a thought - imagine OBL struggling to decide which decadent metropolis most deserves annihilation.

I would say, Gumboot, that NZ is pretty safe in this regard. Not that it is an insignificant country, or anything like that. More that in terms of man-made icons there isn't a great deal to target (the Sky Tower maybe?), and the NZ government hasn't really done a great deal to antagonise AQ.

Australia is a possible target, most likely Sydney (though Melbourne has it's own icons, and Crown Casino could be a target due to the nature of casinos...), because a nuclear device could easily take out both the Harbour Bridge and the Opera House in one go. Two icons for the price of one. Not to mention Kirribilly House...

But more likely still is another attack against either the UK or the USA. Major political players, and rife with symbols of "evil Western capitalism".

Personally, I'd prefer none of the above...

 

[gumboot]

I agree. IIRC OBL is (or was) pursing possible acquisition of a nuclear weapon. That would be a Very Bad Thing, IMO. Who would be the target? Now that's a thought - imagine OBL struggling to decide which decadent metropolis most deserves annihilation.

That would be an unpleasant hypothetical to consider...

It'd be a complicated one two, for a number of reasons:

1) If you have a nuke you can't afford to waste it, so there's no point selecting a target that increasing risk of detection. I'd propose a low-security coastal city.

2) Osama Bin Laden has never been especially keen on attacking the US at home - that was KSM's obsession. Prior to 9/11 Al Qaeda's attacks were always abroad and primarily military installations.

A city in the Middle East? A US military port? A less wary ally - Australia or Canada, the UK or another?

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

I would say, Gumboot, that NZ is pretty safe in this regard. Not that it is an insignificant country, or anything like that.

Now, let's be honest. New Zealand is an insignificant country. We just don't like to admit it.

You're right, New Zealand is an unlikely target. I think Australia is probably a fairly possible target given Australia has a high profile in the War of Terror, yet is perhaps perceived as an easier target than the US. However I'm not sure what the radical islamic population is like in Australia. Somewhere like the UK might be a good one - solid radical islamic community, high profile, accessible (it's a small island) and more liberal than the US (so less stringent security).

-Gumboot

 

[Mobyseven]

A home grown terror cell would be unlikely for this sort of attack though (IMHO).

More likely that a device would be smuggled into the country by a small group of foreigners (perhaps from different countries) and used as quickly as possible.

Minimizes the chance of being caught.

 

[g4macdad]

Yes as long as we instill fear in everyone about the horrible things that could possibly happen in the future, maybe. All those what if's ,those crazies out there, are capable of.

We will remain a secure and safe country.

Especially if we just remember to kill them before we think they could just maybe by some chance have the capability to attack us.



<(((><

 

[gumboot]

Yes as long as we instill fear in everyone about the horrible things that could possibly happen in the future, maybe. All those what if's ,those crazies out there, are capable of.

We will remain a secure and safe country.

Especially if we just remember to kill them before we think they could just maybe by some chance have the capability to attack us.



<(((><

Strawman...

-Gumboot

 

[g4macdad]

Strawman...

-Gumboot

Yes strawboy?

<(((><

 

[Thunder]

My America doesn't invade countries without a true justification based on crap evidence. My America only uses violence as a last resort.

WW2...has to be fought. WW1..had to be fought. Iraqi war...war of choice.

 

[gumboot]

Yes strawboy?

<(((><

...

I was naming the fallacy in your argument - strawman.

Please remember your membership agreement and refrain from personal attacks.

-Gumboot

 

[SkepticGuy]

This is a question for truthers.
What do you like about America?

I don't consider myself a "Truther", but many here have applied that label because I speculate on aspects of 9/11 conspiracies, and enable many others to do so.


About a year ago, I penned something that relates to your question:
"I Once Dreamed Of Liberty"

(snippet)
I can still feel the exuberance of discovery. That moment of clarity that revealed to me the powerful dreams of unimaginably brave people who dared to set forth a new nation. With brilliant strokes of a mighty pen, a nation based on self-evident truths and liberty sprung into extraordinary life. The genius of the words and the sacrifice of their champions resonate with undeniable power throughout history.

Youthful dreams of grand ideas, scintilating futures, and unlimited potential emerge out of this discovery. What a grand and wondrous responsibility it is to live in an era where we can look back to the brilliance of a Bill of Rights, the genius of a Constitution, and tearfully brave hope of a Declaration of Independence. With that foundation and the knowledge of the thankless deeds of the founders, how could the future be anything but spectacular?

And a follow-up:
"Maintaining Liberty Is The Hardest Thing to Do"

Among the most difficult things modern free societies have before themselves is the effort of maintaining hard-won liberties. Erosion of critical freedoms come from all sides. Among the most talked about are the popular new items related to domestic spying and abuse of executive power. But there are far more subtle causes of erosion, causes we often find ourselves accidentally supporting.

The majority of "truthers" are activists who would otherwise be mobilizing "action" to protest "something" if not for the highly sensationalist theories that have evolved from the idea of conspiracies surrounding the events of 9/11. True "conspiracy theorists" want to be proven incorrect, desire their theories to be wrong, and want nothing more than to encounter a lack of inspiration for conspiracy speculation. Unfortunately, history proves that such hopes are flights of fancy.

 

[g4macdad]

My America doesn't invade countries without a true justification based on crap evidence. My America only uses violence as a last resort.

WW2...has to be fought. WW1..had to be fought. Iraqi war...war of choice.

Unfortunately our current leader destroyed "your" America long ago.

<(((><

 

[g4macdad]

...

I was naming the fallacy in your argument - strawman.

Please remember your membership agreement and refrain from personal attacks.

-Gumboot

Sounded exactly like another personal attack on me, by you, in another thread.
I can easily provide the link to the admin if needed.

Please remain respectful.

<(((><

 

[gumboot]

Sounded exactly like another personal attack on me, by you, in another thread.
I can easily provide the link to the admin if needed.

Please remain respectful.

<(((><

Link?

I don't recall ever personally attacking you. If I did, I'm happy to apologise...

-Gumboot

 

[Whiplash]

Unfortunately our current leader destroyed "your" America long ago.

<(((><

"The sky is falllllliiiiing!!!!"