Are they targeting expensive homes and big insurance in California?
1 posted on
11/14/2008 4:47:58 PM PST by
Sammy67
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
To: Sammy67
Setting forest fires would be a strategic blunder on a par with Napoleon and Hitler invading Russia.
Think it through ... they would alienate the environmentalists, and there would be hell to pay. Waterboarding would be the least of their worries.
They had better stick to killing people. The left can rationalize that away.
31 posted on
11/14/2008 5:42:41 PM PST by
sphinx
To: Sammy67
They’ll have to wait until next summer, because dry tinder is a scarcity from now until at least the middle of next year, unless they just want to burn down California.
32 posted on
11/14/2008 5:49:58 PM PST by
ought-six
( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
To: Sammy67
Good, start with Chicago. It has a great history of burning to the ground.
33 posted on
11/14/2008 5:52:06 PM PST by
RetiredArmy
(America is entering four very long and cold years. First victim: liberty)
To: Sammy67
Let’s light a fire in his cave.
36 posted on
11/14/2008 6:01:18 PM PST by
machogirl
(when the call comes at 3:00 am, Bill Ayers answers the phone)
To: Sammy67
As a resident of Southern California, and seeing firsthand the amount of destruction one or two loose nuts can do when the Santa Ana winds blow, I have long dreaded the possibility of such an attack. These guys fight asymmetrical warfare. 19 fanatics with box cutters and flight training struck a huge blow.
It would be a lot easier to commit arson on a grand scale, with just a tad of coordination, when the conditions are ripe.
To: Sammy67
Thanks to Babbits’ roadless iniative they’ll be much more effective. What are ‘’public servants’’ for.
38 posted on
11/14/2008 6:04:01 PM PST by
Waco
( Crapa democrat)
To: Sammy67
Well now that Obama is president, the whole world loves us, and Al Queda just won’t have the heart to bomb us.
And if worse comes to worse, Obama will just have to have a talk with Ossama. That should do it.
To: Sammy67
I propose beating out any and all future forest fires with the nearest convenient Muslim. They are chock full of fire-extinguishing liquids.
To: Sammy67
Ah now this is really gonna piss Oprah off.
To: Sammy67
His Obamic Holiness will save us, won’t he?
42 posted on
11/14/2008 6:09:39 PM PST by
Fresh Wind
(Hey, Obama! Where's my check?)
To: Sammy67
Why would Al Qaeda want to risk making their friends on the left mad at them? Doesn’t make any sense. The environmentalists would want to slap Osama. That’s right, slap him and then slap him on the other side of his face (sorry only South Park fans will get this).
46 posted on
11/14/2008 6:42:43 PM PST by
willk
To: Sammy67
I am certainly no expert but this seems highly implausible. To have a major forest fires I think you need certain conditions which don’t exist in Europe or in most of the US. The forest has to be extremely dry for a long period and those conditions don’t exist in most of Europe or the US. Not sure about Australia.
48 posted on
11/14/2008 7:39:28 PM PST by
yazoo
To: Sammy67
War is fire ... it has always been fire ... firepower ... fire arms ... fire when ready ... fire!!!! ... and when the boss gets pissed off enough, “You’re fired!” Therms are therms.
49 posted on
11/14/2008 8:32:57 PM PST by
JTWildfeather
(Russia, China, Military, Arms, Race, Oil)
To: Sammy67
Palesimians tried this in israel in the Jewish national Forest in the 90s. They were ultimately thwarted.
51 posted on
11/15/2008 2:34:53 PM PST by
sheik yerbouty
( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson