kelpdiver 2 #26 January 16, 2008 QuoteIt should be realized that many of the terrorist nations react perfectly logical - when being invaded by the US, they fight in the only way they are technologically capable of: IEDs and suicide bombers. If the US don't attack first, or stage "Gulf of Tonkin" incidents to wage war, there is no way that men with sticks and stones would harm Americans 4000 miles away. Uh, it's pretty clear that Al Queda attacked first. Repeatedly. And self defense doesn't really explain the efforts of non Iraqis in Iraq. It is quite logical for the US to be concerned about the free roaming enemies in Europe. You may call it window dressing, and it may well be, but if another attack comes from people let into the country by immigration, the people will be quite angry. The homeland security types have little to lose by being heavy handed, and nothing to gain by the opposite. But in viewing how they keep pushing out the timetable for requiring passports for travel in Mexico/Caribbean that used to be covered by a birth certificate, it's clear that hassle eventually wins out over this overbearing security approach. At least if you're Americans. They don't seem as worried about the hassle foreigners deal with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #27 January 16, 2008 Quotesounded like you were worried about "negative influences of other cultures" getting into the US. Hell no! NEO-CON & ULTRA-RIGHTIE influences aside, I am very interested and involved in other cultures, especially Mexican. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #28 January 16, 2008 > Yeah.. because the US of A is soooo good at securing it's borders fancy a quick skinny dip across the Rio Grande anyone? Let's see if we can find some nice curtains to dress the windows a bit more..... (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #29 January 16, 2008 Quote Lets have some perspective, for a change. Point taken. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 569 #30 January 16, 2008 Quote I believe that you have an entirely false impression of the scale of terrorism in Europe.. It's almost non-existant. Way more people die on the roads or from smoking etc... etc... and way less money spent to solve these much larger problems But isn't there lots of terrorism in that little country Iraq that sits on the border with Scotland and FranceExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #31 January 16, 2008 naughty, naughty leave our [misguided] cousins alone. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #32 January 16, 2008 QuoteHaven't you had more attacks on US soil in the last few years from people, US or other nationalities, who were perfectly legal to be there? How many attacks from people entering the country illegally? Yep, and that should be the point of "increased security". The object should be to stop people from being deemed "legal" who have bad intentions for being here. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DZJ 0 #33 January 16, 2008 Found parts of that article quite amusing: Quote"We have deployed almost twice as many border patrols as we had five or six years ago. We've put up literally hundreds of miles of fencing and barriers. "How do we defeat the threat of well-funded, ideologically commited and sophisticated extremists hell bent on the destruction of our way of life who have no qualms about causing massive casualties?" "I know, a fence! That'll stop 'em!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jjiimmyyt 0 #34 January 16, 2008 Quote Quote Haven't you had more attacks on US soil in the last few years from people, US or other nationalities, who were perfectly legal to be there? How many attacks from people entering the country illegally? Yep, and that should be the point of "increased security". The object should be to stop people from being deemed "legal" who have bad intentions for being here. So what would have been done about Timothy McVeigh? To continue on the foreign threat though: Having had the pleasure of meeting TSA staff I don't see how them looking in my shoes, taking my fingerprints and generally being a pain in the arse, unlike the Immigration people who are usually quite nice, is going to improve security. Although I did get a laugh as my shoes were reeking with pond water from Lake Wales To go further The Simpsons idea see here http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/tigerrepellantrock.html "This isn't an iron lung, people. You can actually disconnect and not die." -Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #35 January 16, 2008 and ban the sale or wire clippers (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites