English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

After the events of September 11th, are we safer or in just as great of a risk for major terror attacks such as the one 6 years ago?

2007-11-12 01:12:32 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

16 answers

we are more at risk. al quieds is stronger than ever.
its just a matter of time before terrorist strike america again.
they wish to strike us when we least expect it.
i feel next time will be worse than 9-11.
i hope i am wrong, but feel that i am right.

2007-11-12 01:17:55 · answer #1 · answered by Jerry S 7 · 1 0

In terms of real risk, there is no more of it than there was in , say, 1995.

By 1995 there were already many people making bombs, trying to blow up buildings, hijacking airplanes, and killing students in schools.

The biggest single change since 9-11 is that Americans lost self-confidence, and that is largely because the combination of government and and the media has blasted people into feeling afraid of almost everything.

There is no more reason to be afraid now than there was before 9-11, but through constant government and media efforts, including sensationalizing even small episodes, Americans have been taught to be afraid, and to believe Americans should be under more government control.

Today fear and weakness have led to Americans giving up some of the freedoms on which America was built, and what made America the magnificent and strong country that it was, before 9-11.

The America that was built 200 years ago is now dying, as the substance of America, the freedoms of the people, are being forsaken by so many people today, in the false and entirely empty quest for security.

Veterans Day, November 11, was just yesterday. Yesterday we celebrated those who gave their lives to ensure the freedoms we enjoy every day.

How quickly we forget.


.

2007-11-12 01:41:55 · answer #2 · answered by Ef Ervescence 6 · 0 0

It wasn't finger pointing time until eventually Clinton did no longer respond the subsequent 5 circumstances the U. S. or this is hobbies have been attacked! It replaced into then that the yankee people found out that they had a shameless coward sitting interior the seat of the commander in chief. the vast distinction between the 1st and final incidents have been this: George Herbert Walker Bush replaced into out of place of work whilst the 1st commerce center attack befell. This u . s . a . replaced into being examined by using Islamic terrorists, whilst the 1st attack befell, whilst the 2nd WTC attack befell, below GWB, the terrorists already believed the country does no longer respond because of the fact it had no longer, on the final 5 incidents. The precedent had already been set by using Clinton, to no longer react to attack. the guy feared our own militia complicated greater effective than he did the enemy. this is real, the militia had little regard for the Clintons, despite the fact that it does no longer have allowed this is dislike for them to intrude with this is militia responsibilities. You stated that the Clinton administration began working to maintain us risk-free from terrorism, it is as a approaches fetched as a assertion can in all probability be. There concept of retaining the yankee people from terrorism replaced into to confirm the problem in civilian courts. it is so a approaches as Clinton ever went in struggling with the enemy of immediately. it is the same enemy as that of 1993. only how deep interior the sand are you Clinton fans arranged to bury your heads, until eventually now you will finally admit the Clintons are greater effective than only losers? they are risky losers, because of the fact they suspect they could produce a win, win undertaking for all, and that only ain't so. between 1992 and 2000, we tried Clintons social test of being superb to all of us. He grew to become the different cheek, each and every time our u . s . a . replaced into attacked. Why, he finally ran out of cheeks to coach, yet nevertheless did no longer something. So, do no longer you dare tell the yankee people who we want the Clinton's lower back, do no longer you fu cking dare!

2016-10-16 05:48:36 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Do you believe that the issue is true?
In 1992 terrorist kill 17.000 indicent people in palestine, the amount of the victim is 5 times higher than the victim in 11/9. But nobody put it as terrorism issue. Why USA as the main target (which they say) terrorism? Do the other countries that being threatened by terrorism have something is common?.
In my opinion the anti terrorism programe will raise the hatred level of any other country to USA.
USA gain profit by selling weapons and guns both to Israel and Israel's enemies. Thats why the issue terrorism need to support the capital oriented financial system.

2007-11-12 01:24:09 · answer #4 · answered by trish 2 · 1 1

How could the risk be any greater than what occured Sept. 11th? Unless you mean an attack on an even greater scale. I don't feel that the risk of another attack is lessened, but I do feel that we are in a better position to thwart one; and have.

2007-11-12 01:33:00 · answer #5 · answered by Raymond 6 · 0 0

There are some groups of people in the middle east that Hate anyone that does not believe what they believe. For instance, some say the koran teaches peace, and there are other groups that say the koran says to kill all Jews and Christians. They teach their children to Hate, how to blow themselves up and kill innocent people, and place little value on human life. These people are radicals and will never stop hating, and will remain ignorant for a long time to come, and that's sad.

2007-11-12 01:43:42 · answer #6 · answered by Johnny Reb 5 · 0 0

i think it was a guy from the IRA who in the '80s said something along the lines of "we only have to get lucky once, you [police etc] have to be lucky every single time"
we are just as likely to suffer a terrorist attack today as before 9/11. i have know idea how to stop this type of thing. but i think the government is trying to do the right things

2007-11-12 01:40:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

As long as we keep Republicans in the whitehouse we'll be better off. Have you noticed that in all the debates the Democrats have had, not one of them has been able to bring their self to say the word "Islamo-fascist". Wow, don't talk about it and the problem will go away huh! As long as the Democrats continue to see world wide terrorism as a Law & Order issue and not a military issue, they should not be taken serious.

2007-11-12 01:22:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Terrorism at the moment is a self defeating concept, you cant convert the views of a dead body. But anyway there has always been that threat, 10 years ago we were worrying about communism, now its Islamic extremism, next environmental extremists. there will always be something, most of us will ignore it!!!

2007-11-12 01:40:03 · answer #9 · answered by Beenie 3 · 0 0

Thanks to President Bush we are much safer now. Not completely safe of course. The government is extremely inept, but we are safer than if the liberals were in charge.

2007-11-12 02:54:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers