Fear Wins - Depressing

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
No one belives that the planes-as-missile approach will succeed again. The point is to prevent a terrorist from murdering the passengers on the plane. [/quote]

Agreed. Why then is security is so tight (borderline paranoid) in airports, when train stations and other means of transportation are vulnerable. I really don’t understand why they confiscate my mineral water and lens-cleaning solution in airports, when train stations are more frequented here in Europe. An bomb attack on a train here is very easy to carry and could kill substantially more people than taking down a plane. Yet, it seems to me that they’re worried only about planes.

If anyone has any idea as to why that is, I would be very much interested in hearing it.

[quote]lixy wrote:
If anyone has any idea as to why that is, I would be very much interested in hearing it.
[/quote]

Because they do not want the planes to be hijacked, used as missiles or blown up over cities. Maybe a train can be blown up as it is traveling through or under a city. I really hadn’t thought about it. There were attacks on trains, like the ones in Japan and Spain, so I do not know why there is not more security. No one tried to use a train as a weapon yet, I suppose.

I saw an interesting thing when I put a letter in the mailbox this weekend…now there’s weight limits on how much you can put in a mail box. Anyone else hear about this or know any details about it?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Because they do not want the planes to be hijacked, used as missiles or blown up over cities. [/quote]

But, but…we just established that “No one belives (sic) that the planes-as-missile approach will succeed again”. Do you disagree with Thunder and myself?

Well, I have a different theory. They are either protecting the aircrafts which, let’s face it, cost a boatload of money, or they are more concerned about people who fly planes than they are about those riding the Greyhound. This is the best explanation I could come up with, and it really doesn’t satisfy me.

This is not an answer to Lixy’s question, but rather an observation about the train attack in Tokyo.

The Aum cult was not targeting civilians in this case, but the government. The devices the agents placed on the subway trains were set to release their sarin nerve gas just as all five trains passed beneath the Parliament building. Had everything gone according to plan, the Prime Minister and numerous Diet members would have died.

As it was, eleven passengers died and nearly six thousand were hospitalized.

Subway security was practically nonexistent before the attack, and with the exception of a few uniformed policemen at Tokyo station, it has not gotten much more stringent.

I am not in a position to speak with any authority on the present state of security at the New York and Washington DC public transportation systems, but it occurs to me that it would be much easier to sneak a terror weapon onto a train than onto a plane.

One scenario I can imagine is a 250-ton yield tac-nuke in a rucksack (they only weigh about 50 pounds), detonated between the Wall and Fulton Street stations in New York. This would take out the Federal Reserve Bank, the Stock Exchange, and most of the financial district, while effectively cutting off transportation between southern Manhattan and Brooklyn.

[quote]kroby wrote:
pat36 wrote:
My contention that abortion is murder and the numbers are so high, that I could not vote for a pro-choice candidate who otherwise espoused my values. It this case it is a numbers game.

As long as there are over a million abortions a year in this country nothing will take precedant over that. If that number were say a thousand or even a couple of thousand, then my answer would likely change because it would no longer be a slaughter of epic proportions.

How about a million deaths per year (and 4.9 million world-wide) related to smoking?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/11/health/main525264.shtml

Does that merit your attention equally? Where is the outrage? Where is the political platform? Is this not a slaughter of epic proportions?[/quote]

Being a former smoker I can assure you that smoking is quite a voluntary action. So no, it merits no concern on my part. People can do what they want as long as it does not affect other people. That’s not a very good analogy by the way.
Here’s another strawman: 61% of traffic deaths in 2005 were caused by sober drivers. That has nothing to do with anything either. I was asked a direct question and I answered it directly. He was refering to something else I posted in another thread; we by no means are trying to get into yet another abortion debate. That will yet rear it’s ugly head agian but I am not ready for it so soon afther the last one. I have to resharpen my fangs.

[quote]lixy wrote:

Agreed. Why then is security is so tight (borderline paranoid) in airports, when train stations and other means of transportation are vulnerable. I really don’t understand why they confiscate my mineral water and lens-cleaning solution in airports, when train stations are more frequented here in Europe. An bomb attack on a train here is very easy to carry and could kill substantially more people than taking down a plane. Yet, it seems to me that they’re worried only about planes.

If anyone has any idea as to why that is, I would be very much interested in hearing it.[/quote]

For the simple fact that the practical problems of the two very different forms of transport make for differing approaches.

Train transit - especially in the US - is used for short term commuter-type transit. In DC and NY, for example, people use it to get to work. The transport has high turnover rate - it does not lend itself to security scrutiny like a flight would.

Creating the kind of security scrutiny at a trainstop that an airport warrants would completely nullify all the benefits of commuter train transit that we are trying to encourage. That is a practical problem that doesn’t exist in flight, where people aren’t relying on air travel for short commutes in lieu of driving and already have to go through a security checkpoint.

Is train transit vulnerable because of this? Sure - that doesn’t mean that it has to be treated the same way as an airport, though - that is flatly stupid.

Lixy, much like your approach to foreign policy, you have a “foolish consistency” to always want to treat unlike things in like ways, as a matter of theory. Train transit has its share of weaknesses that must be addressed, but that has nothing to do with how security would be handled at an airport, which operates in a very different way than train transit.

So, no, we aren’t “just worried about planes” - we just rationally recognize that there is no “one size fits all” solution when dealing with the uniqueness of one problem versus another. What provides benefits in airport security doesn’t necessarily yield benefits at the trainstop, so we don’t mindlessly adopt the same policies in different situations.

What a pile of tripe. Nice to see everyone taking shots at their favorite political enemies in a drive by manner…

[quote]vroom wrote:
What a pile of tripe. Nice to see everyone taking shots at their favorite political enemies in a drive by manner…[/quote]

What the fuck are you even talking about?

Oh…I forgot…you never make any sense.

Carry on.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
What the fuck are you even talking about?

Oh…I forgot…you never make any sense.

Carry on. [/quote]

Typical. Now that you are back are you ready to start picking fights and then declaring yourself “teh winner” again?

Put some thought into what I said, or don’t, but don’t blame me if you are too stunned to figure anything out.

[quote]vroom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
What the fuck are you even talking about?

Oh…I forgot…you never make any sense.

Carry on.

Typical. Now that you are back are you ready to start picking fights and then declaring yourself “teh winner” again?

Put some thought into what I said, or don’t, but don’t blame me if you are too stunned to figure anything out.[/quote]

I don’t know what ‘teh winner’ is. I’ll assume you mis-typed. But coming from you - I have learned never to assume even the simplest of things.

Nothing you do or say is capable of stunning me. You are far too entrenched under your thinking tree to assume such a lofty goal as “stunning” anyone.

Since when did you and the jew-hating pro-terrorist become such fast friends? It only took 8-months for your true colors to come out. And I think I called it way before I left.

Yo make it way too easy for me to be right. All you have to do is post.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Since when did you and the jew-hating pro-terrorist become such fast friends? It only took 8-months for your true colors to come out. And I think I called it way before I left. [/quote]

Do the words “Little Joe” ring a bell? Lixy is somebody around here that has the ability to make people think. Many, certainly yourself, refuse to do so. That is certainly your right.

Trying to throw me into his camp because I don’t object to him having the right to voice his opinion is a typical move for you. Congrats on jumping to the lower rungs almost immediately.

Anyway, more interestingly, over time Lixy has learned a few things and adjusted his viewpoints. If nothing else this shows that with appropriate arguments, if folks like yourself can be bothered to think that hard, the muslim viewpoint can become more moderate.

That might have important implications in the long run. Is that worthy of using some of your brainpower?

Oh yeah, look, “teh winner” declarations have started!

[quote]vroom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Since when did you and the jew-hating pro-terrorist become such fast friends? It only took 8-months for your true colors to come out. And I think I called it way before I left.

Do the words “Little Joe” ring a bell? Lixy is somebody around here that has the ability to make people think. Many, certainly yourself, refuse to do so. That is certainly your right.

Trying to throw me into his camp because I don’t object to him having the right to voice his opinion is a typical move for you. Congrats on jumping to the lower rungs almost immediately.

Anyway, more interestingly, over time Lixy has learned a few things and adjusted his viewpoints. If nothing else this shows that with appropriate arguments, if folks like yourself can be bothered to think that hard, the muslim viewpoint can become more moderate.

That might have important implications in the long run. Is that worthy of using some of your brainpower?

Yo make it way too easy for me to be right. All you have to do is post.

Oh yeah, look, “teh winner” declarations have started![/quote]

Trust me, vroom. There is little you have said in the years I have been in this form that is even worthy of a second read, much less waste my time thinking about it. It is, however, quite enjoyable to watch your reactions. You are like the calf that is over whelmed at the placement of a new gate.

I mean, really - how much fucking thought is required to know that your nuts are caught on the pickets, and you have found that you rather enjoy riding the fence? Now you have a new friend. Good for you. Maybe you and he can share a sack lunch under your special tree.

Do you even have a black or a white in your color box? Or are all your crayons gray?

Lixy the jew-hater may have changed - but you have not.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
nothing
[/quote]

Zzzz.

[quote]vroom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
nothing

Zzzz.[/quote]

Get a room you two!

He can’t decide if he wants a king or a queen.

His indecisiveness affects everything.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
He can’t decide if he wants a king or a queen.

His indecisiveness affects everything. [/quote]

What are you on? You are even more cantankerous than usual.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Because they do not want the planes to be hijacked, used as missiles or blown up over cities.

But, but…we just established that “No one belives (sic) that the planes-as-missile approach will succeed again”. Do you disagree with Thunder and myself?
[/quote]

I don’t think the passengers or pilots would let a plane be hijacked. But you’ve got to also consider, if they did not have the jacked up security measures in place, a lot of people wouldn’t feel safe to fly. The airlines could go belly up.

Lol

serious, Vroom, what the hell was:

‘What a pile of tripe. Nice to see everyone taking shots at their favorite political enemies in a drive by manner…’

about?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Lol

serious, Vroom, what the hell was:

‘What a pile of tripe. Nice to see everyone taking shots at their favorite political enemies in a drive by manner…’

about?[/quote]

Absolutely nothing.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Absolutely nothing.

[/quote]

That’s funny.

Spark up the lonely old brain cell Thunderdolt, you can probably puzzle it out if you try.