[Naspino]

It would be a victory for the jihadis to do otherwise.

It has nothing to do with Al-Queda. Its way outdated and assumes we live in a world where an entire building cannot be demolished by a single weapon/person.

Its negligent in my opinion. They lead 300+ million people.

[Rockitz]

The risk is just too great. There are any number of countries such as China or even our old buddies in Russia that would only be too willing to finish the job.

[weegee]

Recall too that last year as countries were being asked to "come on board" with the Iraq war resolution, Islamofascists struck out at civilians where they could. They bombed a night club that was frequented by Australian tourists. This has long happened in some countries.

The media denies that the LAX counter shooting was "terrorism". Anthrax is still tagged the work of a "lone nut". Charles Bishop was a "troubled teen" (who pledged his support for Osama and called his acts "terrorist"). You don't hear the word "terrorim" tied to the DC sniper duo. The shoe bomber barely was stopped in the act.

We HAVE been getting terrorist attacks. I don't need to hear from the security experts about the actions they stopped (it would give information to the underground). It is foolish to believe that we have been perfectly safe since the 9.11.2001 attacks.

It is even a mistake to believe that 9.11.2001 was the first domestic strike. In 1993 there was an attempt to blow up the WTC (and the poison gas used in that attack incinerated). There was a muslim sniper outside of the CIA entrance in the 1990s too. Again, many other attacks may have been attributed to lone nuts (and not just some controversial attacks like OKC).