We have not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis (quoted)

Fox News | 10/31/2001 | Fox News

[Don Joe]

Fox News broke for a bulletin a few minutes ago. The announcer said that new information had just been received from the government, saying that the current emergency is very serious. They (the gov't) said that we have not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis. They said that the most critical period would be within the next 72 hours.

[lavaroise]

You know, your hysterical shreiking regarding jailing leftists who "support" Muslims give your views no credibility here. You sound like a parody of what the left thinks we are. Go post on DU.

Dude, wake up and smell the anthraxhttp://www.frontpagemag.com/guestcolumnists/horowitzchomsky10-31-01.htm

Maybe you care to remember what the treatment for traitors and spies are in war: Execution. I am far from promoting executions, so go get a grip.

[lavaroise]

So enlighten me: if jailing American citizens who do not agree with you is not a fascist approach, what might it be?

It is not a question of disagreement, it is a question of open military support for the enemy. In times of war targets are military, not civilian. Discussion of targets should be centralized other whether such target is worthy, would make too much collateral damage or if it is legitimate in terms of tactics. Leftists cheering on the side of muslims are potential war targets, whether you bleeding hearts like it or not.

[Little John]

.... We have not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis (quoted) ....

Whoever wrote the headline was probably not alive during the Cuban Missle Crisis or the Cold war for that matter.

I do not mean to trivialize the current threat, but I can't see any scenario in which possible actions by the Taliban or their fundamentalist Muslim followers which could lead to an all out exchange of nuclear weapons on a global scale by super powers ..... and that is what was at stake in the Cuban Missle Crisis.

The last thing we need is the press exagerrating the situation.

[Don Joe]

Some non-nits to pick with your logic:

Last things first -- it was not "the press exagerrating the situation" -- it was the press reporting what the government said about the situation.

If you don't like the fact that the government compared the current situation with the Cuban missile crisis, then you should take it up with the government. Attacking Fox News for reporting it is a classic case of "shooting the mesenger."

Next, you misapply the meaning of the statement when you say:

I can't see any scenario in which possible actions by the Taliban or their fundamentalist Muslim followers which could lead to an all out exchange of nuclear weapons on a global scale by super powers ..... and that is what was at stake in the Cuban Missle Crisis.

The government -- that's the US government -- said that "we have not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis". [emphasis mine]

Please note that they did not say that "the world has not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis".

OK? Get it? The message is that the United States faces something as threatening as the the United States faced in 1962. (It said nothing at all about the world facing any such threat.)

So, exactly what did the United States face back then?

It faced a number of medium range ballistic missiles with large nuclear payloads, which were capable of striking approximately fifty percent of the continental US landmass.

Now take a deep breath, and ask yourself if "any scenario in which possible actions by the Taliban or their fundamentalist Muslim followers which could lead to" something on that scale is something to take seriously, or something to shrug off as we go about our patriotic duty to shop for new cars.

Before you let out that deep breath, you should take a moment to contemplate something very curious about the latest government statement. This is the first time that we've been hit with something that runs counter to the "no big deal, go shopping, buy a car" nonsense.

If you still can't see that the government is taking this very seriously, and telling us that we should take it seriously too, then perhaps you shouldn't waste your time thinking about it. Instead, just go shopping, buy a car.

[Stefan Stackhouse]

Russian nuclear weapons, like American ones, have coded interlocks that prevent their detonation by a crazed individual within the Russian military itself, much less anyone who might steal one.

Which means that a middle-eastern guy who came over to the US on a student visa and earned a grad degree in electrical engineering is going to have to disassemble the control mechanisms and design, assemble, and install new ones. This might take a few weeks, a few months at the most.

The only value of the coded interlocks is to prevent their IMMEDIATE unauthorized detonation.

[That Poppins Woman]

Maybe ... but look at West Nile. When the mosquitoes hatch in spring/summer, all the folks who've been commanded to take Cipro for the winter (nearly all gov't employees) will drop dead at their first West-Nile-infected-mosquito bite. (Antibiotics severely weaken the immune system; only weakened immune systems are susceptible to West Nile.)

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

The officials said other information that led to the warning from Attorney General John Ashcroft on Monday suggested known al-Qaida operatives in Canada, Asia and elsewhere were discussing new attacks.

They announced little while ago that they have detained two people from a northwest airlines flight (from Japan) here in Seattle/SeaTac airport. They also said the rest of the plane's passengers remain on board and the plane has been moved to a remote place at the airport.

[Little John]

.... If you still can't see that the government is taking this very seriously, and telling us that we should take it seriously too, then perhaps you shouldn't waste your time thinking about it. ....

If anyone needs to take a deep breath, it is you my friend. .... you might try re-reading my post, particularly the part about not trivializing the current crisis. IMO, there is absolutely no value or benefit to over hyping the current real danger ..... particularly because there is NOTHING constructive about merely restating that we are in danger.

The feelings of helplessness underlying your near hysteria is surely gratifying to the terrs ......

[Don Joe]

"The feelings of helplessness underlying your near hysteria is surely gratifying to the terrs ......"

Your active fantasy life is exceeded only by your smarmy condescension.

If you must insult me like that.. well, if you're uncontrollably compulsive as well as annoyingly cloying, then I guess I'll leave you to stew in your own smuggery. Enjoy yourself. Someone may as well, eh?

[Dan Day]

The government -- that's the US government -- said that "we have not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis". [emphasis mine] Please note that they did not say that "the world has not seen such a serious threat since the Cuban missile crisis". OK? Get it? The message is that the United States faces something as threatening as the the United States faced in 1962. (It said nothing at all about the world facing any such threat.)

That's one interpretation, but keep in mind that "since" is usually used in situations that mean, "it's not as big as the event I'm comparing it to, but it's as big as anything that occurred after that up until the current time."

For example, if the Indianapolis 500 had 25 crashes in 1985 (I'm just making up these numbers), and no Indy 500 had more than 10 crashes since then, a newscaster describing this year's Indy 500 with 12 crashes would describe it as "the most crash-ridden Indy 500 since 1985", despite the fact that it didn't come close to the 1985 total.

So the question is not, "what would equal the Cuban Missile Crisis", the question is, "what would equal any threat that has happened since"?

Given that the years since the Cuban Missile Crisis have been mostly safe and calm ones, I don't know if that quote should be taken as direly as people have interpreted it.

And not even 9/11 may have been meant to be included in the comparison, since that wasn't a "threat", it was a "done deal" without any preceding threat whatsoever.

[Dan Day]

Last things first -- it was not "the press exagerrating the situation" -- it was the press reporting what the government said about the situation.

No, it was the press reporting what ONE PERSON in the government said about the situation. For all we know, he might have been one of the Chicken Little types, and/or someone who doesn't have the whole picture anyway and is jumping to conclusions based on what little he does know.

I wouldn't get too concerned about that statement until an official government statement is released with such a phrase, because then it *would* be a policy statement (e.g., one arrived at by consensus), and one which was backed by full knowledge of the situation.

I think it's irresponsible for Fox to report such an inflammatory statement without sourcing it. Small bits of information are okay to air with nothing more than "our sources tell us", but for something that provocative of the public's concern, they should hold off until they can report it with an attribution, or at least a clear statement of why it should be taken as gospel. This is *not* the time for rumor-mongering.

[Clinton's a rapist]

No, Zyklon B is/was an irreversible cholinesterase inhibitor, similar to other insecticides and binary nerve gases. It's mechanism of action is to inhibit the breakdown of acetylcholine at nerve endings, essentially making the parasympathetic nervous system fire without stopping (for the purists, there are exceptions--this is basic). The mechanism of action of cyanide is to replace oxygen on the heme (oxygen carrying iron) portion of hemoglogin, starving cells of oxygen.

You are incorrect. You are thinking of Sarin, a nerve gas produced by the Nazis, not Zyklon B. Concentration camp victims were not killed with nerve gas, but with Zyklon B. Zyklon B was an insecticide carrying hydrogen cyanide.

Zyk·lon-B [z? klon b?] noun

hydrogen cyanide gas: hydrogen cyanide released as a gas from pellets, used originally as an insecticide and later as a deadly gas by the Nazis during World War II

Encarta® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1999,2000 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

[jammer]

You are correct and I am incorrect about the composition of Zyklon B. My apologies.

[lavaroise]

Sieg heil.

What do you expect US soldiers do every day at war? Sing flower songs and discuss the first amendment with their sergeants? That's what the peace nicks wanted our soldiers to do in Nam - with the result of having millions of South Vietnamese ruined and killed when we let the North run over them. We are at war and we are all soldiers.

Lincoln carried out a murderous war that in some terms paled in comparison to Hitler or Stalin, who at least did not carry out purely total civil wars against their own people - Hitler targeted Jews only. In the end Lincoln gave us back our freedoms, and that's the difference between Hitler and Lincoln. Both needed the salute of the troops, the later however knew the difference between war time and peace time burdens. I suggest you learned about those differences too.