Another Attack?

[Ender]

I'm inclined to think we may have another attack right before the election. We know Al-Qaeda wants Bush removed and may try the same strategy as they did in Spain. If you may recall they bombed a train killings hundreds of people and that resulted in a new leader for that country. Do you think that is a sound strategy on their part? or do you think that may backfire on them?

I tend to think another attack on our own soil would further resolve us into defeating these monsters, and that would not necessarily be in Kerry's favor. Then again it may. But the likelyhood of some sort of attack is a real possibilty of occuring.

 

[Cruentus]

I tend to think another attack on our own soil would further resolve us into defeating these monsters, and that would not necessarily be in Kerry's favor. Then again it may. But the likelyhood of some sort of attack is a real possibilty of occuring.

Another attack is possible. And, I agree, another attack would not be good for Kerry.

 

[loki09789]

Another attack is possible. And, I agree, another attack would not be good for Kerry.

I would say that it would be bad for everyone in the country regardless of the candidates/leaders. Look at the scrutiny of Bush and his actions, agree or disagree with his actions and policies, the speed and urgency of these attacks both real ones and potential ones have really made for some fast and sloppy decision making. I don't know if it is totally the "Bushism" that is the problem or the mood, urgency and fear that comes with this type of new realizations of vulnerability.

Markets are driven by perceptions as much as they are driven by reality. Fear makes people real cautious and depressed. We will all suffer if more attacks come

 

[Thesemindz]

Yes I think they'll do it, and no I don't think it will seriously impact on the election. People either see evil for what it is, or they never will.

Then again, I thought they would do something on the one year aniversary of 9-11 and they didn't. So who knows how these guys think?

Honestly, I think our country will see a terrorist attack within the next five years that results in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. I think it's just to easy to kill people. What if they infected a "martyr" with a plague or pox and sent him to the Super Bowl? While he's there he could use every toilet and visit every snack bar. Two weeks later people all over this country are infected. We have universities in this country that have stocks of contagious disease on hand. How hard would it be for a group of terrorists with small arms to raid a university?

I don't know the answer to terrorism, but I don't think we're really going to make a serious effort to fight this war until we see hundreds of thousands of casualties. I hope I'm wrong.


-Rob

 

[qizmoduis]

I'm inclined to think we may have another attack right before the election. We know Al-Qaeda wants Bush removed and may try the same strategy as they did in Spain.

Are you kidding? Right now, Bush is their best recruiting tool.

 

[michaeledward]

We know Al-Qaeda wants Bush removed.

How do we know what al Qaeda wants?

Some have argued that al Qaeda is now a dead organization. Richard Clarke, in his book Against All Enemies, said President Bush asked for cards with pictures of the leaders of al Qaeda on them, so that the President could put an X through those leaders that are killed or captured. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has stated that the majority of al Qaeda's leaders have been killed or captured.

The problem now, and in the future is not al Qaeda, but rather new organizations that are using al Qaeda's methods. There are perhaps hundreds of new organizations that have formed around the world, with the intent of an Islamic World.

As history has shown, the United States tends to be looking in the wrong place when the attack comes.

Mike

 

[Cruentus]

Are you kidding? Right now, Bush is their best recruiting tool.

Don't say that or you'll be considered unpatriotic!

As to mikes comments about Al Queda being dead; That may be the intel, yet they will still try to link Berg's murder to Al Queda, as the "liberal" media has been doing, to try to link Al Queda to Iraq. Gee...it would be nice if we had verifiable evidence to support the claim first.

Also...when I said a terrorist attack would be bad for Kerry....of course it would also be bad for the nation as well. Frikkin duh, that goes without saying!

 

[qizmoduis]

Don't say that or you'll be considered unpatriotic!

As to mikes comments about Al Queda being dead; That may be the intel, yet they will still try to link Berg's murder to Al Queda, as the "liberal" media has been doing, to try to link Al Queda to Iraq. Gee...it would be nice if we had verifiable evidence to support the claim first.

Also...when I said a terrorist attack would be bad for Kerry....of course it would also be bad for the nation as well. Frikkin duh, that goes without saying!

Being considered "unpatriotic" by Bush sock-puppets is near the bottom of my list of things I care about.

 

[CanuckMA]

Don't say that or you'll be considered unpatriotic!

As to mikes comments about Al Queda being dead; That may be the intel, yet they will still try to link Berg's murder to Al Queda, as the "liberal" media has been doing, to try to link Al Queda to Iraq. Gee...it would be nice if we had verifiable evidence to support the claim first.

Also...when I said a terrorist attack would be bad for Kerry....of course it would also be bad for the nation as well. Frikkin duh, that goes without saying!

Fine, I'll say it. Bush is Al-Qaeda best recruiting tool.

 

[loki09789]

Also...when I said a terrorist attack would be bad for Kerry....of course it would also be bad for the nation as well. Frikkin duh, that goes without saying!

Actually the reason I mentioned it is because it doesn't go without saying. If it is bad for the whole country, it will cause problems for the candidates.

People choose politicians because of lots of reasons. If the economy, security and morale of the country takes a dive because of another attack (yes, it is possible) then, much like Bush's pre 9/11 planning, platforms go out the window. Immediate and short term issues become more important to the citizens and government. Kerry - or any candidate - who wants to use a tear down of the Bush administration and their actions during this debacle will be under the microscope because the reaction will be "now your in office, do it better" and any sign of imperfect action/execution/information.... will put them even further in the whole because the perspective will be "Damn, Bush did better than that" even if he really didn't.

If it is bad for Kerry or any candidate, including Bush, this is why I think it is so.