Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WoofDog123
What are your thoughts on this? Do you think the odds of a catastrophic attack against one or more US cities is higher or lower than it was, say, in 1990? I think it is certainly higher.
**********************************
Our borders are wide open, and security at our airports is no better than it was in 1991, despite the "danger" from terrorists.

I'd say that there is a much higher chance of a 9-11 style attack today than there was in 1990.

52 posted on 09/16/2004 8:07:13 PM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: exodus

"I'd say that there is a much higher chance of a 9-11 style attack today than there was in 1990."

Actually I was thinking in terms of a nuke or release of a bio-agent, or chemical agents, which was the type of threat we would have faced from the russians (Nuke, mainly).

Such an attack would make a 9/11/01-type attack look puny. THAT is the kind of attack I worry about. 2 buildings going down will not put this country down. 2 or 3 major cities going down will crash our economy, close our banks, crash the market, cause tailspin unemployemnt, crash the dollar, and that is just what I can name in 30 seconds.


72 posted on 09/16/2004 8:53:02 PM PDT by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: exodus

I've addressed some interesting article to "All" that you should look over. It seems when you kick a dog long enough, even a Muslim dog, it will bite.


176 posted on 09/16/2004 10:42:32 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson