"The truth is that no one really was concerned until it came crashing down on us where the Twin Towers used to stand."
That is not supported by the facts.
"This directly contradicts what you said to Chris:"
Where is the contradiction? I was pointing out that i-node, apparently like you, is pretending that no one was concerned with terrorism at all until 9/11. Now the argument can be made that maybe it should have been put at a higher priority. But claiming it wasn't there at all is a lie.
"But it seems these days, I see "Fantasyland" popping up again,"
Yup. Because your team has been trying to recon history. Not that it is unusual for y'all, but...
Ok, I went back to one of my old posts.
To: Scumbria who wrote (130195) 12/29/2000 11:00:55 PM
From: combjelly Read Replies (1) of 376723
"Not to mention a release of anthrax or neurotoxins in a major city."
Sadly this is true. Biological or chemical weapons (just imagine VX in any major airport) are a much more potent threats than ICBMs lofting over the poles. Sure, we are getting closer to being able to stop them, but we have effective ways to stop a calvary charge also. The days of ICBMs are numbered, the classic problem with the military is they are always beautifully prepared to fight the last war. Rarely does an opportunity arise, like in Desert Storm, to fight the war you are prepared to fight. Okay, Desert Storm actually was a WWII style war and not like Vietnam or Korea, but you catch my drift. In that respect, we are still not well prepared to fight a nasty, ill-defined war like those two proved to be...
Message 15099922
I have been talking about the threat of terrorism for a long time.. |
