The World Thru My Eyes - I speak my mind and man does it like to talk.
Not exactly what it sounds it seems
Published on July 11, 2007 By CharlesCS In Politics
I notice that the phrase “less safe” is often, either used or implied, on this site, mostly by people pointing towards how the US is less safe than before we went to war. And this is not necessarily from one person on this site (resident troll as he has been called).

The thing is every time I see it written or implied I often ask myself what exactly do they mean by this? How exactly are we less safe than before after we are aware of a threat? Either way are we ever any safer than before when you are facing a determined criminal?

Here’s my point. In this day in age of technological advances places like banks have some of the most sophisticated security systems. They have vault doors so think it’s a wonder if they could ever get them open if they somehow got stuck (odd chances but you never know, right?). Security cams are a dime a dozen, sensors; lasers and even inch thick glass in some places. Yet, a determined criminal still manages to steal money from these banks, even with security guards on site. Houses with expensive security systems still get broken into, cars with security features that turn off engines and keys that can not be copied still get stolen. Ever criminals in jail find ways to escape with all those guards, cams, sensors, dogs and fences.

Now imagine a terrorist (no specific race, culture or religion), a guy/girl determined to kill as many Americans as possible because for some reason he/she’s mad at us. They enter the country legally or by means of false papers. Our laws restrict us from doing anything to this person cause they have not yet committed any crimes or given any reason for suspicion. Information on floor plans, structural integrity, how to make a bomb, all the components necessary, cameras for studying locations, transportation, prepaid cell phones, internet; all either free or at minor cost, easily accessible and legal. At any time this person can find out how to make a bomb, acquire the materials needed to build one without any cause for concern, do surveillance of the target without any suspicion of a possible attack, study the plans of the target, communicate with other accomplices with prepaid phones, use a stolen or rented vehicle, park it in front of the building or in the garage if it has one and blow up the vehicle destroy most if not all of the building killing everyone inside including bystanders, cars passing by and maybe even people in the buildings near by. The irony of all this? Chances are they could get away with it and not have anyone know hardly anything until after it happens. And to make it worse, hardly anything they did, except for the making of the bomb and blowing it up was illegal. But who would have known? Who would have guess that this person who seemed like a nice person by those who knew him/her or had met him/her would do such a thing? Right now, as we speak there are some out there waiting for the right moment to try something like this, do we know who they are? Maybe, maybe not. But we will never really know till the damage is done, just like on 9/11.

So tell me, with all the satellites in orbit, with all the cameras everywhere across the country, with all the cops, security guards, vigilant civilians, security systems, fences, walls, guard dogs, guns and intelligence agencies; are we ever safer when facing an enemy that is determined to kill us, is patient waiting for the right moment and worst of all faces a security system that, no matter how advanced, was created and is controlled by none other than people, who are prone to ignorance, laziness, carelessness, makes mistakes and can even be part of the enemy itself.

So when exactly are we really safer? I say never, because history and the development of better security technology has shown that a criminal will eventually find a way around it, a determined criminal, who is protected by the laws of this country even after committing the crime, will always find a way and therefore technology will always have to be improved. But this does not mean we have to live in a paranoid state. It does not mean we have to throw the rule book out the window and start locking up everyone that looks suspicious, start banning all bomb related information, making the purchase of certain materials that could be used to make bombs illegal. Too many freedoms would be taken from us if we begin to panic over everything. What we need to do is have an iron fist, we need to put our foot down and demand countries that harbor, supply, train and/or finance terrorist. We need to show them that if you mess with us we will take action; we will do what is necessary to survive. Even if it means having to bend our own rules a little to do it. Hey, in my opinion, it’s them before us.

Comments
on Jul 11, 2007
on Jul 11, 2007
'LESS SAFE'' IS A LIBERAL BUZZWORD saying nothing. it is a way of pointing out.. NOTHING. they cannot point to a specific act so they point to..NOTHING.
on Jul 11, 2007
I’m sorry this article makes no sense. Do you not understand the concept of less and more? If it’s not possible to make us less safe then it’s not possible to make us safer. But we know that’s not true. If we leave Iraq that’s going to make us less safe, right? I personally, even though I have never supported the war, believe it has made us safer. I just believe the resources used could have made us allot safer if used differently.

Its odds, when you leave your car in a parking lot and one car thief arrives the odds of him stealing your car are low, if five car thief’s show up the odds of your car being stolen go up. Your car becomes less safe. That is what those whom are saying we’re less safe are talking about, they think the war has increased the number of terrorist and they are right, it has. However they can burn flags and riot all they want, if they don’t have the support of Governments, which I think they have less of now, we will have to watch CNN to even know there mad at us.



on Jul 12, 2007
I’m sorry this article makes no sense. Do you not understand the concept of less and more? If it’s not possible to make us less safe then it’s not possible to make us safer. But we know that’s not true. If we leave Iraq that’s going to make us less safe, right? I personally, even though I have never supported the war, believe it has made us safer. I just believe the resources used could have made us allot safer if used differently.


You seem to understand it quite well as far as I see. I agree the resources could have been put to better use.


Its odds, when you leave your car in a parking lot and one car thief arrives the odds of him stealing your car are low, if five car thief’s show up the odds of your car being stolen go up. Your car becomes less safe. That is what those whom are saying we’re less safe are talking about, they think the war has increased the number of terrorist and they are right, it has. However they can burn flags and riot all they want, if they don’t have the support of Governments, which I think they have less of now, we will have to watch CNN to even know there mad at us.


But in the end the danger was always there. The chance of you car being stolen still existed. Most security systems are designed to deter not stop a crime. That's my point. When it comes to terrorist, we are never less safer as long as they are determined to kill us, it doesn't matter how many more cops we put on the streets, how many more people we harass, what technology we use. They will always find a way to get to us, because they have the spirit, the belief, the hatred and the numbers. The news says Al-qaeda is as strong as before, I say they never lost strength. They just did what they do best, use our own rules against us, hide amongst the the civilians and wait, wait for the right moment. Wait for us to feel comfy again and do it all over again.
on Jul 12, 2007
Wow, featured again? Kool.
on Jul 12, 2007
But in the end the danger was always there. The chance of you car being stolen still existed. Most security systems are designed to deter not stop a crime. That's my point. When it comes to terrorist, we are never less safer as long as they are determined to kill us What we need to do is have an iron fist, we need to put our foot down and demand countries that harbor, supply, train and/or finance terrorist. We need to show them that if you mess with us we will take action; we will do what is necessary to survive. Even if it means having to bend our own rules a little to do it. Hey, in my opinion, it’s them before us.


Safety is an illusion I agree but there are varying levels of danger. If there wasn’t, and nothing we did changed this level, why do anything?

on Jul 12, 2007
Safety is an illusion I agree but there are varying levels of danger. If there wasn’t, and nothing we did changed this level, why do anything?


Good point. Still, to me when it come to terrorist, there is only 1 level, extreme. I don't think we will ever be safer from terrorist so long as we fear them, which is where the word terrorist comes from, terror. But of course you already know that. WE have to instill fear in them in order to rid ourselves of this menace, but because of our way of life, that might be impossible without throwing the rule book out the window.
on Jul 14, 2007
Let's se if I follow this, we should terrorize terrorists so that they wil stop terrorizing us? We should use an iron fist and trample on citizen freedsoms to protect our freedom? Hmmm. Sounds an aweful like Doublespeak to me.

Be well.
on Jul 16, 2007
Let's se if I follow this, we should terrorize terrorists so that they wil stop terrorizing us? We should use an iron fist and trample on citizen freedsoms to protect our freedom? Hmmm. Sounds an aweful like Doublespeak to me.


Nope, you failed to follow completely and got lost in the process. I never said terrorize terrorist. I said if we gonna go to war we need to stop thinking that people should not die in wars. I'll never understand the point of making such devastating weapons as the ones that we have here in the US while at the same time trying not to kill because we think somehow even terrorist deserve a chance. That's about as hypocritical as an animal activist that is not a vegetarian. When I say "instill fear", I mean make them think twice about attacking us, I mean showing them that if necessary we too will shoot back with greater force. This is about survival, not getting what we want. Sure we have politicians who see a financial benefit from these kinds of situations but if we as Americans are dumb enough to let politicians with financial greed make decisions for us all the time then we deserve to get blown up. And what freedoms are we taking away from who? I don't understand your point here, I'm starting to think you posted on the wrong article.
on Jul 16, 2007
Let's se if I follow this, we should terrorize terrorists so that they wil stop terrorizing us?


LOL.  Should we not "terrorize" them and just play nice and hope they won't ever bother us again.  Worked real well before didn't it?


on Jul 16, 2007
Let's se if I follow this, we should terrorize terrorists so that they wil stop terrorizing us?

LOL. Should we not "terrorize" them and just play nice and hope they won't ever bother us again. Worked real well before didn't it?


I just often wonder what solution do people, who respond that way, have. They think fighting them is wrong but can not give a solution that would eliminate hurting them while stopping them form hurting us. To be honest that idea sounds more like a fantasy than anything else. I mean they don't even point out the fact that terrorist tend to attack innocent people more than anything while we are trying to attack the terrorist without hitting the innocent which while hard to do, is the reason we are not ending this conflict. That's a dumb-ass statement if you ask me.[quote]Let's se if I follow this, we should terrorize terrorists so that they wil stop terrorizing us?


on Jul 16, 2007
give a solution that would eliminate hurting them while stopping them form hurting us.


The "love" bomb: WWW Link
on Jul 16, 2007
ey think fighting them is wrong but can not give a solution that would eliminate hurting them while stopping them form hurting us.


That's hard to do since many of the left consider terrorism to be a "bumper sticker" slogan.