Pages: 1

 

2007-07-10 23:31:26
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6992|San Diego, CA, USA
I thought the United States was the target...all this terrorism is happening in Europe and not in the United States. 

Are we less of a Satan? 

Are we harder to hit?

Why is it that the United States hasn't been hit by terrorism equivalent since 9/11?

Is Iraq really keeping the terrorists busy?  (fight them there instead of here?)

Do terrorists think focusing their attacks against United States soldiers in Iraq will allow them to win alot more support than trying to attack them at home, which would actually just anger us to attack even more countries?

Is Iraq and Afghanistan more important to attack than the United States mainland because it can do more harm to the United States?
2007-07-10 23:32:49
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7013|Portland, OR, USA
GWB didn't need another reason to go to war...

I kid, I kid... But seriously.
2007-07-10 23:41:14
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|7165|Sydney, Australia

Harmor wrote:

Is Iraq and Afghanistan more important to attack than the United States mainland because it can do more harm to the United States?
There was an article months ago in the Sydney Morning Herald where it was said that Bin Laden aimed to economically ruin America, so they would then fall off the world stage (don't care if that could happen or not, I'm just saying what was said). He did the same thing to the USSR in Afghanistan. In that line of thinking, causing truoble in the middle east means that america would have to remain there and continue to throw money into the operation. At the same time, this money is being diverted from possible domestic uses (eg.healthcare, education, etc).


If anyone doubts the concept, then think about why America's symbols of economic might were targeted on Sep 11.
2007-07-10 23:44:59
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7218|Noizyland

There are many theories:
- America's new security is so on top of everything the terrorists do they have covered every single scenario.
or
- The terrorists simply do not have the resources to do a 9/11 scale attack every day.
or
- The terrorists are moving into more unconventional methods of sabotaging the United States - as McMinty's SMH article suggests, financially crippling the United States can be considered one of these methods. Think about it, America's international debt is already in the billions, and with wars like Iran looming they simply cannot afford to fund themselves. Already American soldiers are relying on their family to supply manditory items such as body armour or flashlight batteries so it's a very plausable theory.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2007-07-10 23:50:57
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6992|San Diego, CA, USA
Unlike Russia with Afganistan, we have the largest economy in the world (many of our states have larger GDPs than some of the other G8 nations). 

The money is not the issue, if anything its a catalysis to our economy if you believe in Keynesian economics.  The fact that our dollar is being devalued thanks to the Chinese Yuan sticking itself low, we can afford this war. 

The GDP of the United States is $13.13 trillion (2006 est.).
As of 2006, the national debt was nearly USD $9 trillion or 64% of GDP and climbing rapidly because of the war.
2007-07-10 23:53:44
2tuff
Positive Karma Here!
+357|7219
I am errmmm they are planning.
2007-07-10 23:57:34
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7118|Canberra, AUS
It took ten years between the first WTC attack and the second - do you really think they would strike year in year out? The only place I know where that happens is Indonesia (but it's stopped now), where the terrorist group is actually BASED in the target country.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-07-10 23:58:25
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7218|Noizyland

The net GDP of the United States is not 13.13 trillion. It's natonal debt, as have just found out, is in the general region of 5 trillion though. More importantl, how can one say that the USA's finances are not stretched when their own soldiers are not supplied with the basic equipment they need to survive. When soldiers have to fork over money for their own body armour something is wrong, especialy in the military of an incredibly powerful nation like the United States. The US is not as financially stable as the majority of the world's population believes it to be.

However the US contributes shit-loads of it's GDP to forgein aide, and if they wished to they could cease all their contributions to retain their own strength. If terrorism drives them to do this the reprocussions on a global scale will be extreme. Forget towers collapsing and 2,000 - 3,000 people being killed, it will be global chaos.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2007-07-11 00:04:39
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6992|San Diego, CA, USA

Ty wrote:

More importantl, how can one say that the USA's finances are not stretched when their own soldiers are not supplied with the basic equipment they need to survive. When soldiers have to fork over money for their own body armour something is wrong, especialy in the military of an incredibly powerful nation like the United States.
The problem with supplying the troops is manufacturing.  As you know manufacturing has been sent overseas.  Did you know the berets that the Special Forces use are made in China, for example.  Fewer and fewer supplies and parts are made in the United States.  More than half of all our jobs are in the Service Industry.

Another example was the armored Humvees.  These take a while to make and so it took years before we replaced all our Humvees with armored ones.

As for the body armor, that problem was with Rumsfeld...he didn't believe that we needed new body armor and so didn't ask for them.  It was only when congressmen were alerted by military family members that they changed their policy after the political fallout.
2007-07-11 00:20:46
mcminty
Moderating your content for the Australian Govt.
+879|7165|Sydney, Australia
Further to the theory I put forward, an attack within America will unite the country. Average citizens and politicians will all be fighting for the same cause, people will be more patriotic. By attacking overseas, and keeping America in an unpopular war, the divisions in both society and politics will be widened.
2007-07-11 00:22:36
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7118|Canberra, AUS

Harmor wrote:

Ty wrote:

More importantl, how can one say that the USA's finances are not stretched when their own soldiers are not supplied with the basic equipment they need to survive. When soldiers have to fork over money for their own body armour something is wrong, especialy in the military of an incredibly powerful nation like the United States.
The problem with supplying the troops is manufacturing.  As you know manufacturing has been sent overseas.  Did you know the berets that the Special Forces use are made in China, for example.  Fewer and fewer supplies and parts are made in the United States.  More than half of all our jobs are in the Service Industry.

Another example was the armored Humvees.  These take a while to make and so it took years before we replaced all our Humvees with armored ones.

As for the body armor, that problem was with Rumsfeld...he didn't believe that we needed new body armor and so didn't ask for them.  It was only when congressmen were alerted by military family members that they changed their policy after the political fallout.
Which is why you need an experienced soldier in the position of SoD, not some smug, stuckup Washington powerbroker...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-07-11 00:24:05
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7118|Canberra, AUS

mcminty wrote:

Further to the theory I put forward, an attack within America will unite the country. Average citizens and politicians will all be fighting for the same cause, people will be more patriotic. By attacking overseas, and keeping America in an unpopular war, the divisions in both society and politics will be widened.
Good point, that's EXACTLY what happened following 9/11 and the London attacks (whose date, alas, escapes me).

However, a POSSIBLE attack is a different matter.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-07-11 00:29:49
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7160
the reason is that when they come to the US... they realize that they can live in freedom and make money... kinda takes the anger away when you realize that the US is made up of people from everywhere that just want to live their dreams....
Love is the answer
2007-07-11 00:32:39
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7044|132 and Bush

Ty wrote:

The net GDP of the United States is not 13.13 trillion. It's natonal debt, as have just found out, is in the general region of 5 trillion though. More importantl, how can one say that the USA's finances are not stretched when their own soldiers are not supplied with the basic equipment they need to survive. When soldiers have to fork over money for their own body armour something is wrong, especialy in the military of an incredibly powerful nation like the United States. The US is not as financially stable as the majority of the world's population believes it to be.

However the US contributes shit-loads of it's GDP to forgein aide, and if they wished to they could cease all their contributions to retain their own strength. If terrorism drives them to do this the reprocussions on a global scale will be extreme. Forget towers collapsing and 2,000 - 3,000 people being killed, it will be global chaos.
The United States has had a national debt nearly it's entire existence. As a matter of fact we bought half the country with loans (Louisiana Purchase etc..). As far as the military not supplying basics like body armor, that's just piss poor logistics and planning. We spend billions to develop F-22's as if the future of warfare is going to be fighting ghost fighters over China. We should be investing that money in the tried and true work horses of the military. The future is to continue to provide ground support, not Raptors. http://integrator.hanscom.af.mil/2005/A … 005-20.htm
Xbone Stormsurgezz

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard