With a nuclear black market around the...


PDA






aspen1964
October 14, 2006, 08:39 PM
corner a distinct possibility, can America afford to not absolutely secure it's borders...?...the game-playing politics of today and yesterday must end...

If you enjoyed reading about "With a nuclear black market around the..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
goings_51
October 14, 2006, 08:44 PM
I don't think any amount of security will stop a determined terorist. The governemnt has spent a lot of money and trampled a lot of rights, but studies have shown that we are less secure now than we were Sept. 11. We need resonable security, but we also need to reach out to the rest of the world instead of trying to rule over it. Maybe then, people would hate us less and have less of a reason to want to cause harm.

aspen1964
October 14, 2006, 08:53 PM
..the world is growing perverted in it's idea of right and wrong, I have doubts that reaching out is going to change anything until the perversion subsides...as far as security, there are no guarantees..but I don't declare defeat before even giving it a serious try..you obviously do...I don't believe putting yourself closer reach to an entity bent on killing you is a sensible idea...if we cannot hope to secure our own border than there is no reason for us to expect to do anything else in any other country to change things for the better...lastly, I don't see America trying to rule the world..but there are other countries who do dream of such ambitions of global conquest and power of dictatorship...

longeyes
October 14, 2006, 09:36 PM
I don't think any amount of security will stop a determined terorist.

I don't think any amount of terror will stop a determined free market capitalist.

The globalists will keep the borders open for profit until there's a "paradigm shift" engendered by a white flash somewhere.

Sam
October 14, 2006, 09:36 PM
Defense never works, easier for them to make one more golden BB than for you to stop it.
The only way to safety is to totally and ruthlessly eliminate your enemy.
No national will for that here.

Sam

Lucky
October 14, 2006, 09:38 PM
Goings51, what you suggest is a long-term plan that would reap short-term results. There's your problem. 'Making friends', 'Losing enemies', 'Building alliances', these are not new ideas and not bad ideas. But they take a long period of time to implement, measured in years and decades.

Standing Wolf
October 14, 2006, 09:40 PM
I doubt we're going to admit there even might be a problem until it's a disaster: politicians are always concerned first, last, and always with getting re-elected.

thexrayboy
October 14, 2006, 09:49 PM
It is just a matter of time before some terrorist group or another manages to get a nuclear device, find a way of delivering it to a target in the US and detonating it. It maybe this year, next year, 10 years from now or more but
it is a virtual certainty. The reason is no matter how hard we try to play nice with other people we must realize that we will always face a group of people who hate us and want us dead simply because we exist. The reason for this hate may be religious (muslim), insanity (N. Korea), or just a county or group aiming for a political gain. But it will happen unless we can find a way to control the production and storage of fissile material everywhere with 100% accuracy which is highly doubtful.

Warren Buffet, the great stock picker, predicted the same thing. This is a man who probably has access to the most widespread intelligence on world activity that is rivaled only by cabinet member politicians, he may even know things they don't know. We must do everything in our power to control access to our borders but the sad reality is we must get it right 100% of the time to avoid attack. The attackers only need to get it right once.

AF_INT1N0
October 14, 2006, 09:53 PM
Sam,

+1

And unfortunately

+1

Those unwilling to kill the enemy will be killed by him..

ConstitutionCowboy
October 14, 2006, 09:55 PM
...but we also need to reach out to the rest of the world instead of trying to rule over it. Maybe then, people would hate us less and have less of a reason to want to cause harm.

It has nothing to do with hate and everything to do with casting blame for their and their people's woes and/or woeful forms of government on someone or thing other than themselves, and/or for their own personal gain and/or ego in the case of dictators, tyrants, theocracies, oligarchies, and despots.

Don't make the mistake of believing that we rule over the rest of the world, either. We don't. If we did, EVERYONE on this globe would be as free as we are.

Most of the rest of the world's people want what we have but are unwilling or unable to do what it takes to secure it for themselves, or simply blinded into believing we have taken it all and won't share. There are even people in this country who believe that big lie!

We do need to secure our borders. We need to clean up the mess the lax enforcement of our immigration laws has caused, too. And, don't forget to arm yourself, for we may need to be called to the defense of our land.

Woody

We the People retain our weapons to the end of protecting our rights, freedom, and security for when governments fail - or ignore, endeavor to usurp, or delete those rights and freedoms. B.E.Wood

Manedwolf
October 14, 2006, 09:56 PM
The only way to safety is to totally and ruthlessly eliminate your enemy.
No national will for that here.

And right now, we're making enemies faster than we can kill them.

Let's see, we'd have to nuke most of the middle east, a good portion of Africa, also Indonesia, a lot of China, good chunks of northern South America, Cuba of course, and even parts of Russia.

Heck, let's just build a bubble over the US and incinerate the rest of the atmosphere. Because someone might become our enemy later, right?

LightningJoe
October 14, 2006, 10:13 PM
I want my descendents to live in a world which consists of America, her friends, and her dead enemies. I will vote for whomever looks like he has a workable plan for getting there.

Lucky
October 14, 2006, 10:31 PM
Xrayboy could you elaborate or link to the stuff on Buffet? His track record speaks for itself. Maybe he's buying property somewhere, or selling???

.45&TKD
October 14, 2006, 10:53 PM
but we also need to reach out to the rest of the world instead of trying to rule over it. Maybe then, people would hate us less and have less of a reason to want to cause harm.

goings_51,

It must make you feel good to talk like that. Did you learn that from some encounter group?

Its your kind of weakness that helps put this country at risk.

Geronimo45
October 14, 2006, 11:00 PM
How long before this thread's locked? Only the Shadow knows...

LightningJoe
October 14, 2006, 11:08 PM
One or two nuclear detonations wouldn't be the end of the world. For us. We'd need to make them the end of the world for somebody, though.


What we need is a list. A list of countries we'll obliterate if we get nuked. No negotiation. We don't investigate who did it or anything. You're on the list, we get nuked, you're gone. You don't like that? Get yourself off the list.


Tentative list:

North Korea
Iran
Syria

ETXhiker
October 14, 2006, 11:26 PM
Tentative list:

North Korea
Iran
Syria

France. :evil:

If you enjoyed reading about "With a nuclear black market around the..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!