A Question of Doom Priority | |
| mikebo2 (OP) User ID: 4907712 04/30/2012 08:09 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| mikebo2 (OP) User ID: 4907712 04/30/2012 08:21 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 13965468 04/30/2012 08:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your first problem is thinking the government could or would stop the attack.All of the security measures you spoke of really do next to nothing to stop a terrorist attack,unless the borders are secure. Your second is that people are helpless and dependent on a government for there well being.While some may be,most are not.Community is the key to safety,not government involvement. The government(federal) has one job.To secure the state by protecting borders.If they did just that job would they not eliminate the scenario you are asking about?If they did that job there is no need for a police state,evacuation plans,or for citizens to give up any rights for "protection". If the government focused the effort at the border and spent the resources available to it would missiles on roof tops be needed? So I offer a third option to your question. The government does the job of protecting citizens by protecting the borders,thus eliminating a possible attack before it happens not dealing with the aftermath. |
| mikebo2 (OP) User ID: 4907712 04/30/2012 08:34 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your first problem is thinking the government could or would stop the attack.All of the security measures you spoke of really do next to nothing to stop a terrorist attack,unless the borders are secure. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13965468 Your second is that people are helpless and dependent on a government for there well being.While some may be,most are not.Community is the key to safety,not government involvement. The government(federal) has one job.To secure the state by protecting borders.If they did just that job would they not eliminate the scenario you are asking about?If they did that job there is no need for a police state,evacuation plans,or for citizens to give up any rights for "protection". If the government focused the effort at the border and spent the resources available to it would missiles on roof tops be needed? So I offer a third option to your question. The government does the job of protecting citizens by protecting the borders,thus eliminating a possible attack before it happens not dealing with the aftermath. Well stated and I agree for the most part. However, you are describing a perfect government... which does not exist. We must deal with the cards that we have, not the ones we wish we had. My scenario is very real. We have 2 things coming up that require, just these questions that I have put forth. Chicago and London |
| mikebo2 (OP) User ID: 4907712 04/30/2012 08:40 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| mikebo2 (OP) User ID: 4907712 04/30/2012 08:56 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 13965468 04/30/2012 09:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your first problem is thinking the government could or would stop the attack.All of the security measures you spoke of really do next to nothing to stop a terrorist attack,unless the borders are secure. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13965468 Your second is that people are helpless and dependent on a government for there well being.While some may be,most are not.Community is the key to safety,not government involvement. The government(federal) has one job.To secure the state by protecting borders.If they did just that job would they not eliminate the scenario you are asking about?If they did that job there is no need for a police state,evacuation plans,or for citizens to give up any rights for "protection". If the government focused the effort at the border and spent the resources available to it would missiles on roof tops be needed? So I offer a third option to your question. The government does the job of protecting citizens by protecting the borders,thus eliminating a possible attack before it happens not dealing with the aftermath. Well stated and I agree for the most part. However, you are describing a perfect government... which does not exist. We must deal with the cards that we have, not the ones we wish we had. My scenario is very real. We have 2 things coming up that require, just these questions that I have put forth. Chicago and London There is no point in option one.It will not prevent anything.That said option two is unrealistic,doing nothing to prepare for large events is just stupid. So how about option 4. Put plans in place to deal with your inevitable failure to prevent the attack.Put the resources(physical)toward dealing with an attack after it occurs,put your intelligence assets to preventing an attack. You could wall off the entire city,and not prevent an attack.Surface to air missiles and tanks will not stop a man with an ink pen sized vile from throwing it to the ground in a crowd,nor would it stop a suicide bomb of any type. The reality is bad things have and will happen in the world.Try to deal with the most likely with out over reacting and set up to deal with an eventual event happening.Do not use fear of an event as a reason to curb freedoms or you become an event to the people you think you are protecting. As in all things in life.Prepare but do not act irrationally and do not give up freedoms and liberty for the sake of safety or you have already lost. |