|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
 Posted - 10/28/2001 : 14:01:45
|
Few people would of dreamt that anyone in their right mind would use civilian airliners as missiles to destroy skyscrapers in a suicide kamikazi style plan. But they have already highjacked airliners in the past, and do not hesitate using themselves as human bombs as they believe in doing so they will be rewarded in the afterlife for attacking the so called "infidel". So when we analyse what they have done in the past, it was no big surprise
So now for some these nightmare scenarios in which we must all be highly vigilent. The world as we know is already very much on the alert for any repeats of what happened in New York or Washington and the thought that they may even hit a major nuclear power station causing a nuclear fallout far greater than Chernobyl. We are on guard for that, lets hope!
But we also must consider oiltankers. Just the thought on one of those fully loaded gaints bombs ramming into Manhatten would be far more catastrophic than what has already happened, and whats more like the airliner attacks, it does not require much advanced technology like the developement of nuclear weapons. All is needs is a simple act of something that was very common way back in the 18th century. piracy and that is becoming worryingly more common in recently. Lets hope the world is very much on the alert for this nightmare scenario.
 bjones
Remember: When you die your philosophy dies with you
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
 Posted - 10/28/2001 : 15:57:44 [Permalink]
|
There are many ways some group bent on hurting the US can get at us. We are at an extreme disadvantage because the enemy knows where we are. We aren't going anywhere. The terrorists come from all over the world. They can just kick back and think of ways to hurt us that we never thought of. We can never protect everything all the time no matter how hard we try.
We will never be secure until we are not hated in the Arab and Islamic world. Yes, there will still be terrorists but without that broad support they would have a hell of a time operating. With the broad support they now enjoy almost any home is a potential safe house for terrorists. Bombing the enemy will just make the support for terrorists increase. I think we have already seen some of that.
In short, I think the US is taking the wrong approach to our security. We are bombing with virtually no effect and seeing our freedoms stripped away. I doubt any of this is going to do much good and actually does harm to everyone except the terrorists.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
 |
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2001 : 16:29:17 [Permalink]
|
Yes I think there will allways be terrorists who want to strike back in ways we never thought of, as the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights near Sydney was once a suspect target at the time of the Olympic Games. Who knows Al Qaeda may of well has a similar kamikazi style of attack plan for that, to totally sabotage the games. You could imagine a scenario when just as security was on the alert for supicious trucks that came near the reactor, in flew a civilian airliner with distastrous results.
Australia and any other ally of America is not safe in this dangerous and diplomatically delicate time. I dread to think of what the consequences would be if one of those super tankers was used to torpedo the Sydney Opera House and thus cause the entire Sydney Harbor to erupt in one great firey conflagration, taking with hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. Lets hope it never ever comes to that.
bjones
Remember: When you die your philosophy dies with you
quote:
There are many ways some group bent on hurting the US can get at us. We are at an extreme disadvantage because the enemy knows where we are. We aren't going anywhere. The terrorists come from all over the world. They can just kick back and think of ways to hurt us that we never thought of. We can never protect everything all the time no matter how hard we try.
We will never be secure until we are not hated in the Arab and Islamic world. Yes, there will still be terrorists but without that broad support they would have a hell of a time operating. With the broad support they now enjoy almost any home is a potential safe house for terrorists. Bombing the enemy will just make the support for terrorists increase. I think we have already seen some of that.
In short, I think the US is taking the wrong approach to our security. We are bombing with virtually no effect and seeing our freedoms stripped away. I doubt any of this is going to do much good and actually does harm to everyone except the terrorists.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
 
|
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2001 : 17:19:44 [Permalink]
|
All I can say is: be aware. Find where the security holes are before the terrorists do. Make appropriate counter-moves.
As far as: What could happen? Heck, anything. If I wanted to screw up even a little town like Rapid City SD, I could probably think of a way. I'd likely start with the vital chewing tobacco supply.
Don't "borrow trouble" as mom used to say. But pay attention to what's going on around you. If a guy walks into a store and buys 67 cans of lighter fluid and asks where the nearest airport is, don't be afraid to pick up a phone.
Lisa
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room. |
|
|
|
Donnie B.
Skeptic Friend
417 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2001 : 19:00:45 [Permalink]
|
Actually, an even more devastating threat than an oil tanker (which would be bad enough, I grant you, but the really big ones can't come anywhere near a harbor) is a Liquid Natural Gas tanker ship.
Boston is in the midst of a controversy AWS; an LNG tanker is due in tonight. One was turned away shortly after 9/11; the city and Coast Guard felt they couldn't guarantee security. Now the CG says they can, but the city disagrees, and tried to stop the tanker in court. They lost.
If an LNG tanker blew, it would be the equivalent energy of a small nuclear weapon. Downtown Boston and several other cities and towns around the harbor would be toasted to a delicious golden brown.
-- Donnie B.
Brian: "No, no! You have to think for yourselves!" Crowd: "Yes! We have to think for ourselves!" |
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2001 : 19:39:42 [Permalink]
|
As far as the LG tanker, anyone thought of trotting out there and inspecting the boat? I mean, we have inspectors and I presume they're getting paid.
Now CNN is all over a threat to America's food supply. Considering the diet of the average American, I defy them to define "food". Pop-tarts and Burger King?
A terrorist will want mass-casualty, all else is harassment. While I personally would be pissed to be "harassed", let's take a look at a bigger picture. A postal worker in New Jersey gets sick and dies, and suddenly my local paper is filled with stories of people afraid to open their mail. We need a new term - "terroristic (if that's not really a word, it should be) harassment. Create a climate where I think Ed MacMahann is trying to give me a sheep disease, and I'm afraid to go next door for a barbeque...the bad guys have scored.
Lisa
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room. |
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2001 : 06:41:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Now CNN is all over a threat to America's food supply.
Wrong A-country. I think they mean Afghanistan.  
quote:
Pop-tarts and Burger King?
For me, it's MickeyD's and B&J's ice cream. 
"Hey Butt-Head check this book out! There's a talking snake, a naked chick, then some guy puts a leaf on his SCHLONG!!" [Beavis and Butt-Head Do America]
Edited by - James on 10/30/2001 06:43:08 |
|
|
|
Mespo_man
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2001 : 08:15:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But we also must consider oiltankers. Just the thought on one of those fully loaded gaints bombs ramming into Manhatten would be far more catastrophic than what has already happened, and whats more like the airliner attacks, it does not require much advanced technology like the developement of nuclear weapons. All is needs is a simple act of something that was very common way back in the 18th century. piracy and that is becoming worryingly more common in recently. Lets hope the world is very much on the alert for this nightmare scenario.
Uhhhh, don't look now, but someone is practicing.
From the BBC website:
A Tamil Tiger suicide boat has hit an oil tanker off northern Sri Lanka, setting the ship on fire, military officials said.
Navy patrols have rescued 12 crew members and 13 security personnel from the tanker, named as the MV Silk Pride.
There are no immediate details of casualties.
(:raig
|
|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2001 : 16:11:50 [Permalink]
|
I can recall an incident about 15 years ago when someone threatened to introduce foot and mouth disease into Australia because of the bad prison conditions in Queensland it all came to nothing thank goodness.
But this may well be another one of those nightmare scenarios the may the US. In view of what happened recently in the UK it may be the exact form of economic terrorism Al Qaeda looking for.
And if it breaks out do not be surprised to hear of it breaking out simultaneously in Pennsylvania, Kansas, Oklahoma, California, Texas etc etc, that is a typical style of Arab terrorist attack.
Australia meat prices to make up the shortfall in the US will rise ten fold.
I guess we would all have to turn vegetarian.
bjones
Remember: When you die your philosophy dies with you.
quote:
As far as the LG tanker, anyone thought of trotting out there and inspecting the boat? I mean, we have inspectors and I presume they're getting paid.
Now CNN is all over a threat to America's food supply. Considering the diet of the average American, I defy them to define "food". Pop-tarts and Burger King?
A terrorist will want mass-casualty, all else is harassment. While I personally would be pissed to be "harassed", let's take a look at a bigger picture. A postal worker in New Jersey gets sick and dies, and suddenly my local paper is filled with stories of people afraid to open their mail. We need a new term - "terroristic (if that's not really a word, it should be) harassment. Create a climate where I think Ed MacMahann is trying to give me a sheep disease, and I'm afraid to go next door for a barbeque...the bad guys have scored.
Lisa
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room.
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2001 : 03:51:02 [Permalink]
|
Will foot and mouth disease cross over to buffalo - or are they not related enough to the cattle for the disease to take hold with them?
I prefer buffalo to beef anyway.
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." ~Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. |
|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2001 : 04:33:23 [Permalink]
|
Interesting question, if they are not they will still probably be carriers, as is the case with horses
bjones
Remember: When you die your philosophy dies with you
quote:
Will foot and mouth disease cross over to buffalo - or are they not related enough to the cattle for the disease to take hold with them?
I prefer buffalo to beef anyway.
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." ~Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
|
|
|
|
Garrette
SFN Regular
USA
562 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2001 : 04:39:02 [Permalink]
|
I'll have to dig for the links again, but I have read some convincing stuff that the reaction to F&M disease is vastly overblown. From memory, and therefore perhaps faulty, the salient points in the argument were:
1. Foot and mouth disease is not fatal to livestock.
2. Outbreaks historically die out on their own in a few months without livestock death.
3. Livestock deaths attributed to foot and mouth disease in the current outbreak: 0
4. Livestock slaughtered on the suspicion of foot and mouth disease: over 1,000,000.
Has anyone else seen this or like articles and have comments?
My kids still love me. |
|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2001 : 15:28:48 [Permalink]
|
How would it be if one of those LNG tankers were to ram one of the giant pylons of the Golden Gate Bridge?
Even a much smaller vessel like a fishing boat loaded with dynamite would cause casastrophic results in this case.
I feel we all must be highly vigilant for any possible attack by sea because the Japanese did not only use attacks by aircraft in their Kamikazi attacks during WW 2 they also used manned human torpedoes in the form of mini subs to attack Sydney Harbour. It will not take much for al-Qaeda to build a very crude submarine or aquire an old decomissioned one to launch such a surprise attack as the Japanese did during WW2
bjones
Remember: When you die your philosophy dies with you
quote:
Actually, an even more devastating threat than an oil tanker (which would be bad enough, I grant you, but the really big ones can't come anywhere near a harbor) is a Liquid Natural Gas tanker ship.
Boston is in the midst of a controversy AWS; an LNG tanker is due in tonight. One was turned away shortly after 9/11; the city and Coast Guard felt they couldn't guarantee security. Now the CG says they can, but the city disagrees, and tried to stop the tanker in court. They lost.
If an LNG tanker blew, it would be the equivalent energy of a small nuclear weapon. Downtown Boston and several other cities and towns around the harbor would be toasted to a delicious golden brown.
-- Donnie B.
Brian: "No, no! You have to think for yourselves!" Crowd: "Yes! We have to think for ourselves!"
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2001 : 15:48:40 [Permalink]
|
Wouldn't take anything nearly that fancy. Fill a truck full of explosive material, drive it to the center of the span and there you go.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2001 : 16:15:02 [Permalink]
|
Security for heavy transport is currently very very tight for these landmark bridges, but who knows in 10 years time when the US has dropped their guard of this level of security some group equivilant to al-Qaeda may try something like that. But I do not believe in peering into crystal balls.
quote:
Wouldn't take anything nearly that fancy. Fill a truck full of explosive material, drive it to the center of the span and there you go.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 11/02/2001 : 17:18:02 [Permalink]
|
Say someone is driving a semi truck loaded with explosives towards the bridge...how do you stop it? I suppose we could have snipers standing by but seriously, you can't protect everything worth protecting. We'd all like to but it is impossible.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
