Skip to comments.
Anyone Against MISSILE DEFENSE NOW?
Posted on 09/12/2001 9:32:16 AM PDT by Outraged At FLA
If anything good can come out of this, I would think that the Libs are going to have a hard time trying to dissuade the American people that a Missile Shield is needed.
Although this attack would not have changed if we had Missile Defense in place, I think sheeple are FINALLY opening their eyes to the fact that we are VERY vulnerable, and this tragedy will be nothing compared to a madman with a Missle containing a nuke warhead.
TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
All comments welcome.
To: Outraged At FLA
Perhaps you hadn't noticed: It wasn't a missile that took down the WTC.
2
posted on
09/12/2001 9:36:42 AM PDT
by
Bush2000
To: ALL
Bump....
To: Bush2000
Perhaps you hadn't noticed: It wasn't a missile that took down the WTC.PERHAPS you should read what I wrote:
Although this attack would not have changed if we had Missile Defense in place, I think sheeple are FINALLY opening their eyes to the fact that we are VERY vulnerable, and this tragedy will be nothing compared to a madman with a Missle containing a nuke warhead.
To: Outraged At FLA
I just saw that some democRATic congress people are saying that missile defense is not necessary and that funds should be diverted. This time planes, next time missiles. These people are so crass, sick, and self-absorbed that they are using the attacks as a way to further their pacifist com-symp agenda. To hell with them all!!!!!!!!!!
To: Bush2000
Perhaps you have not considered the fact that if Bin Laden and his minions get hold of a missle, they wouldn't think twice about firing it. Question is can they? With Iran and and other countries getting closer to the technology everyday (experts put it near 10 years) and if rumors regarding states belonging to former USSR are true that they have been hawking technology, it is only a matter of time.
Today you may think that there is no way anyone of these guys can get hold of the technology, but if I told you on Monday, what happenned on Tuesday, would you have believed it?
To: Outraged At FLA
This actually happened: A Lefty has already tried to use the WTC/Pentagon terrorist attack as an argument against NMD in another forum. His 'reasoning'? Since this deadly attack didn't use a nuclear tipped ICBM, it was a guarantee that no missile attack would ever occur.
Crazy? Yes. Lefty 'thinking'? But, of course
To: Outraged At FLA
I predict that America WILL get its defense sheild and that liberals, including Joe Biden, will vote for it.
Arguments like, "It can never happen here..." and "It costs too much to defend Americans against a remote threat..." will not be tolerated.
To: Outraged At FLA
Have you not been paying atention. Those who are against it have been saying for years that an attack will come from within, a nuke on a ship in one of our harbors, local zealots with bombs, etc. Now this has come to pass while you and yours, still asleep at the wheel, continue to call for missile defense at a cost of 100's of billions. The logistics of launching misslies is daunting not to mention the fact that we would know from whence they came.
Please, get a clue.
9
posted on
09/12/2001 9:48:53 AM PDT
by
marsis
To: rightandproudofit
They are perverting the deaths of a few thousand Americans to try to deny missile defenses to our sailors, soldiers and citizens.
The Dems want that money and, as usual, they don't care how many American bodies they have to step over to get it!
10
posted on
09/12/2001 9:50:37 AM PDT
by
mrsmith
To: rightandproudofit
Reported yesterday, that Dianne FeinBITCH wants to all of a sudden, increase spending on Intelligence & the Military!!! What a Opportunistic Asshole!!!!!!!!
11
posted on
09/12/2001 9:51:24 AM PDT
by
Oiler#66
To: marsis
It's you who need to get the clue - your logic is the same as saying, "I don't need to use my seatbelt because my car has airbags."
To: Outraged At FLA
The Miami Herald had an editorial with a dig at George Bush and the idea of a missle shield. I heard a bit of it last night on ABC.
13
posted on
09/12/2001 9:52:24 AM PDT
by
pchuck
To: Outraged At FLA
The money would be better spent on penetrating Middle Eastern terrorist units and the affected U.S. agencies are sadly lacking in this area.
14
posted on
09/12/2001 9:52:38 AM PDT
by
droberts
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
To: Outraged At FLA
Anyone Against Missile Defense Now?
Yes, the scumbag liberal Democrats are against it. Any dollars deflected away from their precious vote-buying programs (welfare, NEA, etc.) and spent on defense are "wasted". The military votes Republican, you know.
I have heard some of the liberal scum actually whining about how financing this war might take dollars out of the ficticious Social Security trust fund! So let me see here: these sudden "fiscal conservatives" think we should "save" Social Security for the old farts, at the expense of allowing our nation's defenses to lapse (as if Commie Clinton didn't do enough of that for the past 8 years)?
To: DownWithGreenspan
Bold off.
To: rightintexas
BOLD BE GONE
To: Post Toasties
A Lefty has already tried to use the WTC/Pentagon terrorist attack as an argument against NMD in another forum. His 'reasoning'? Since this deadly attack didn't use a nuclear tipped ICBM, it was a guarantee that no missile attack would ever occur. Crazy? Yes. Lefty 'thinking'? But, of course Col. David Hackworth, no lefty he, was making this exact argument yesterday on Fox News Channel. His argument is that terrorism of the conventional type is the real enemy and we can forget about NMD.
The "reasoning" here is cockeyed. Just because you used a knife the last time you attacked me does not mean that you will never attack me using a gun.
National defense is the first activity of federal government specifically authorized by the Constitution. We should spend and do whatever we have to do to defend ourselves against all threats. People against NMD are barking up the wrong tree -- NMD is much more relevant than "prescription drug benefits" and other social entitlements. Let's get our real priorities straight here.
To: marsis
"The logistics of launching misslies is daunting not to mention the fact that we would know from whence they came. " You mean like the logistics of launching a missile to the moon? That I guess cannot be done either, I mean, it is just too complicated.
GET A CLUE! Ballistic missiles from rogue countries is an imminent threat! It is alot easier to do that then try to get the nuke in here and detonate it.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson