2006-12-14 08:47:39 · 8 answers · asked by Barrett G 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sadly, I think the whole thing comes down to two points: money and power.
Power, because inspiring people to immediate fear by hyping terrorism is a great way to get them to give unquestioning loyalty to a leader.
And money because without the fear of terrorism, we might begin to wonder exactly why we have to spend 3/4 of trillion dollars every year on a military, when people don't have health care.
Plus, of course, there is simply the fact that a few industries (that happen to be big political donors) stand to lose from action on global warming. The sad thing is that it would spur entirely new industries, and probably help keep America on the technological forefront, but since those industries don't exist yet, we're stuck serving the oil and coal companies.
2006-12-14 08:54:49 · answer #1 · answered by Steve 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope. By then we'll have moved on to Jewish/Christian/Hindu/Tao terrorists.
2006-12-14 17:04:08 · answer #2 · answered by Onion? 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you live to be a hundred and our land is NOT under water, will you be willing to eat your words?
2006-12-14 16:51:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Have you even ever read a science book?
2006-12-14 16:50:37 · answer #4 · answered by Josh 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
i got a bass boat
2006-12-14 17:08:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
your questions are always filled with retardation, are you sure you dont have an extra 21st chromosome, downy?
2006-12-14 16:52:00 · answer #6 · answered by Libs are NERDS 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
HUH? What does this mean?
2006-12-14 16:56:24 · answer #7 · answered by sacolunga 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Your priorities are totally inverted, and you're extremely uninformed.
2006-12-14 16:49:32 · answer #8 · answered by C = JD 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋