Al-Qaeda Threatens to Nuke New York on February 2

[notyoueither]

I fear you may be correct, but I wonder.

We (NATO) are not really into this yet, are we? Not like we have been when we have been serious about threats in the past.

What would happen if NATO actually closed ranks and went after international terrorism with a vengeance and without barbarity? What happens if NATO members spent a significant fraction, comparatively, of what was spent in World Wars blowing each other up, but turned it towards the new battle field?

I don't think the bad guys win, automatically. They only win if we let them.

[Spiffor]

The problem with terrorism is that it is completely different from regular warfare. There is no obvious place where people get trained or build hardware. There is no obvious definition of who's friend and who's foe (in regular warfare, everything is much simpler: any Boche is a foe, any Jap is a foe, etc.)

All western countries have at last taken the terrorist menace seriously, and are now under a real police and secret-service cooperation on this one. But I suppose most services are still wondering how to be efficient in deterring terrorism.

But maybe you're right. Maybe, if we put enough energy and money in chasing down terrorists, maybe if we punish those supporting terrorists where it hurts (their Swiss bank account), we'll instill a climate of fear in terrorist organisations, as nobody could know whether a fellow terrorist is sincere or an agent.

Conspiracies generally fail this way. If we manage to create a terrible climate for terrorist plots (the same way Saddam lived quite isolated for fear of assassination), then we can win without fighting the all-out war against Muslims.

But should they be successful in nuking a city, I don't think anybody will want subtle tactics against "them". "They" are likely to describe a muuuuuch larger population as the terrorists themselves.

[Sprayber]

What I fear the most isn't our response to the external threat, but how it would change our society here at home.

[Spiffor]

I think you should fear both. If you're the keg of powder that lets WW3 loose, you explode just like the rest of us.

[Gatekeeper]

I doubt New York City is going to be destroyed on Feb. 2. If it is, though, the solution is simple: Track down those who were directly and indirectly responsible for it and eliminate them. Using this method, I'm quite sure that most of the Middle East would be left to slog on in its current sorry state.

Gatekeeper

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I think you should fear both. If you're the keg of powder that lets WW3 loose, you explode just like the rest of us.

The only problem is, he can only fear one of them "most"

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


The only problem is, he can only fear one of them "most"

Spiffor: The key to restraining the urge to seek vengence in the most cruel ways is in maintaining the consitution as the guiding force of the country. I have little faith in any person on any side of the political fence, but I do have faith in our system. It isn't perfect and there has been been abuses. But an America that has been attacked in such a way as described and without the restraints put on leaders by our system would be a very scary monster in my opinion.

Would such a thing be likely? I don't know. I would like to think that we would embrace our ideas more after such an attack. But with several million dead and many more dieing, I don't know.

[Sprayber]

Course all that is just speculation. I don't think there will be an attack on that scale anyway.. Something smaller perhaps.

[Timexwatch]

I think it's far more likely that we'll have Arabs/Pakis/Afghanis in camps after the nuking of New York. If we were nuked, who would we specifically target?

[Pekka]

Nuke? I call BS.

I think it's obvious to all what's happening here, they call the threats to wear out the US. It's consuming to have these threats for sure, and they have to be taken extremely seriously.

I think we should concentrate on what we know and what is speculation, so we can fight them. Facts are, that they spread rumours to consume our energy levels and to create fear. It's speculating but will be a fact, that they WILL attack again, it's only matter of when and where. Now, the rumour spreading is still effective, but it will lose its power in the future if none of them are carried on. So, I'd say they are waiting when the response to threat is not so energetic from our part, and then will actually go on with the attack. That way they have the upper hand, and can continue shouting threats and it will create panic and all that to new extent. Of course this will lead to a bad situation as we realize we have no choice but to attack first and attack deep and hard.

[Wernazuma III]

I don't have the time to read the whole thread, but is anyone else wondering that this information comes from "Il Giornale", a newspaper owned by Berlusconi's family.
You might remember, it's the guy who, right after Christmas, spread dubious "informations" about a prevented terrorist airplane attack on the pope...
Berlusconi obviously tries goes even further now in spreading more and more fear and panic in the hearts of Italians with the power of his media empire to gain political advantage.

[Whaleboy]

THE DAY AFTER MY BIRTHDAY????

To hell with liberalism... THE BASTARDS!!!!

Ladies and gentlemen, its time for some slaughter...

[RGBVideo]

Italy’s Il Giornale reports from Washington

A newspaper which is owned by a man with direct contacts to Mafia, what an incredibly reliable source.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Berlusconi obviously tries goes even further now in spreading more and more fear and panic in the hearts of Italians with the power of his media empire to gain political advantage.

Every sly politician knows to milk profit from any opportunity. The way Sept. 11 was recuperated by politicians across the globe was sickening (and we still see the effects). Berlusconi is especially bad in this regard: about every non-conventional opposition in Italy is tagged "terrorist" nowadays

[Dr Strangelove]

What the heck. Why February 2? IIRC the date September 11 had some meaning for the attackers, but does the date February 2 have some meaning for Muslim extremists?