Could A Major Terrorist Attack Come In The Form Of Suicide Ebola Agents?

[theDoctorisIn]

The links you've provided have absolutely nothing to do with what I've posted.

I understand that a bio-terror attack is a possibility. I just don't feel the need to be scared of it happening.

Do you know what the word "terrorism" means?

For it to work, it has to make you scared. I choose to not let it work on me.

There is a difference between between being "scared", being "aware", and being "in denial." Lol. You and your silly little boy buddy seem to be in the latter category.

Neither me nor TheOldSchool has denied that a bio-terror attack is possible. Why do you keep pretending that we have?

Yes, he said I was "ridiculous" among other things. I asked why and neither of you can give me an answer. Both of you look ridiculous.

Now, are you interested in discussing the very real possibility that there could be future biological weapons attacks against the United States or abroad, or are you here to deny the whole thing?

I think that whether or not it is Ebola or something else is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture here.

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

 

[ChrisL]

There is a difference between between being "scared", being "aware", and being "in denial." Lol. You and your silly little boy buddy seem to be in the latter category.

Neither me nor TheOldSchool has denied that a bio-terror attack is possible. Why do you keep pretending that we have?

Yes, he said I was "ridiculous" among other things. I asked why and neither of you can give me an answer. Both of you look ridiculous.

Now, are you interested in discussing the very real possibility that there could be future biological weapons attacks against the United States or abroad, or are you here to deny the whole thing?

I think that whether or not it is Ebola or something else is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture here.

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Shut up, you aren't worth my typing time. You are on ignore, loser. Now get lost.

Another one lost to hysteria. Alas...

 

[ChrisL]

Anyway, what measures do people think the United States should take to defend ourselves against such an attack (biological weapons that is - not necessary the Ebola virus, but any deadly agent). As is noted in my links, it is cheaper to produce than other types of weapons, it is easier to hide and smuggle into a country, and like another poster noted, with those terrorists who are willing to commit suicide in order to harm others, this could potentially be a very serious threat, IMO.

 

[Yarddog]

Hey, Obama said the experts at the CDC said their was a very slight chance Ebola could ever hit the US. see , he was right. And it was only a possibility.
I can think of ways the disease could be purposely spread, Its not that hard once you start thinking outside the box. maybe you all should try that sometime.
( i mean thinking outside the box......... not ebola)

Liberals suck and are incapable of intelligent conversation. Most of them just troll and make drive by silly little comments, at least that's been my experience on most discussion boards.

I have noticed THAT to some extent with 'message board liberals' yet not always... and they sure dont represent all liberals. Its funny sometimes I think the Liberal - conservative thing. Sometimes people who have conservative ideals can actually live their personal lives quite liberaly, and vise versa. I know this to be true.

anyway, I think your concerns are not to Far Out there.... i can think of terrorist possibilities, but honestly im a little afraid to post them . you never know who reads these boards

 

[eagle1462010]

Alright I'll engage on this one. Even though I believe there are far more effective bio agents to attack us.............

Yes, they could go to Ebola Land and jump on a plane, to other parts of the globe or America and use their own saliva and bodily fluids to cause others to catch the disease............

It would only take them willing to die for their cause, and enough money to buy some plane tickets......They would have a couple of weeks to do the deed...........Yes it could be a bio weapon.

 

[eagle1462010]

Anyway, what measures do people think the United States should take to defend ourselves against such an attack (biological weapons that is - not necessary the Ebola virus, but any deadly agent). As is noted in my links, it is cheaper to produce than other types of weapons, it is easier to hide and smuggle into a country, and like another poster noted, with those terrorists who are willing to commit suicide in order to harm others, this could potentially be a very serious threat, IMO.

Peace thru strength....Any group or country that attacks us via a Bio chem weapon will be obliterated off the face of the earth.......If they are terrorist who claim no country then those countries who support these countries should be wiped off the face of the earth.

Bio Weapons are part of the mad principle.

 

[Hossfly]

Well explain then why you think a biological terrorist attack is not possible. I'm waiting for you to FINALLY do something other than your usual 3rd grade responses to every thread.

It's possible. But not with ebola.

What in hell do you think is killing all those people in Africa? It's a deadly disease, spreads like wildfire annd kills fast. I can't believe how gullible you and the rest of the Obama lovers are. Look how fast AIDS spread until they got a handle on it.

 

[ChrisL]

Alright I'll engage on this one. Even though I believe there are far more effective bio agents to attack us.............

Yes, they could go to Ebola Land and jump on a plane, to other parts of the globe or America and use their own saliva and bodily fluids to cause others to catch the disease............

It would only take them willing to die for their cause, and enough money to buy some plane tickets......They would have a couple of weeks to do the deed...........Yes it could be a bio weapon.

That's a good point. It's easy to contain when you know about it, but when it's in the form of an attack it might be completely different.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Neither me nor TheOldSchool has denied that a bio-terror attack is possible. Why do you keep pretending that we have?

Yes, he said I was "ridiculous" among other things. I asked why and neither of you can give me an answer. Both of you look ridiculous.

Now, are you interested in discussing the very real possibility that there could be future biological weapons attacks against the United States or abroad, or are you here to deny the whole thing?

I think that whether or not it is Ebola or something else is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture here.

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

 

[Yarddog]

Anyway, what measures do people think the United States should take to defend ourselves against such an attack (biological weapons that is - not necessary the Ebola virus, but any deadly agent). As is noted in my links, it is cheaper to produce than other types of weapons, it is easier to hide and smuggle into a country, and like another poster noted, with those terrorists who are willing to commit suicide in order to harm others, this could potentially be a very serious threat, IMO.

Im still not convinced the experts know everything about how contageous it is, even if they claim they do. that seems to be the X factor for me. I suppose the first and best defense initially would be to educate people about it

 

[eagle1462010]

Yes, he said I was "ridiculous" among other things. I asked why and neither of you can give me an answer. Both of you look ridiculous.

Now, are you interested in discussing the very real possibility that there could be future biological weapons attacks against the United States or abroad, or are you here to deny the whole thing?

I think that whether or not it is Ebola or something else is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture here.

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

Could they purposely get infected jump on a plane and then spread the disease here.......Is that feasible?

 

[ChrisL]

Anyway, what measures do people think the United States should take to defend ourselves against such an attack (biological weapons that is - not necessary the Ebola virus, but any deadly agent). As is noted in my links, it is cheaper to produce than other types of weapons, it is easier to hide and smuggle into a country, and like another poster noted, with those terrorists who are willing to commit suicide in order to harm others, this could potentially be a very serious threat, IMO.

Peace thru strength....Any group or country that attacks us via a Bio chem weapon will be obliterated off the face of the earth.......If they are terrorist who claim no country then those countries who support these countries should be wiped off the face of the earth.

Bio Weapons are part of the mad principle.

I don't know if some of these terrorists even care though. I wonder if there is anything we could do to prevent such an attack from occurring, and I can't think of anything other than being VERY vigilant and to keep going after terrorists that are a threat to our security.

 

[ChrisL]

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

Could they purposely get infected jump on a plane and then spread the disease here.......Is that feasible?

Right. If we didn't know it was here until it already started spreading, it would be MUCH more difficult to contain than the recent situation where we had a few known cases of it. That is an entirely different scenario.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, he said I was "ridiculous" among other things. I asked why and neither of you can give me an answer. Both of you look ridiculous.

Now, are you interested in discussing the very real possibility that there could be future biological weapons attacks against the United States or abroad, or are you here to deny the whole thing?

I think that whether or not it is Ebola or something else is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture here.

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

I think post #112 is a good question for you to answer. I don't care about that troll. I want to talk about terrorism and biological weapons.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

Could they purposely get infected jump on a plane and then spread the disease here.......Is that feasible?

Of course. But "feasibility" isn't the metric that I use to decide what to be afraid of. Almost anything is "feasible"

 

[ChrisL]

I think it's totally feasible that any contagion has the potential to become a pandemic, if allowed to get out of control initially. That is what happened in Africa and the other nations that were affected the most by Ebola. They didn't have the facilities or the medical expertise immediately available to start isolation procedures and to stop the spread, and now it has grown into a pandemic situation there.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Anyway, what measures do people think the United States should take to defend ourselves against such an attack (biological weapons that is - not necessary the Ebola virus, but any deadly agent). As is noted in my links, it is cheaper to produce than other types of weapons, it is easier to hide and smuggle into a country, and like another poster noted, with those terrorists who are willing to commit suicide in order to harm others, this could potentially be a very serious threat, IMO.

You build a high trust society with high levels of shared values and you pay attention to the odd balls. This is like Block Watch. It's impossible to achieve in a multicultural society though. A few years ago Toronto had a major civil protest by Sri Lankans in Canada who opposed Canadian foreign policy to Sri Lanka. Take that example and multiple by 100 different cultures and you're living in a high threat society. Take Finland where 98% of the people are Finnish or Swedish and you've drastically reduced sources of threat. Of course now you have a boring annual Folk Fest so I can see why people wouldn't want to give that up.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What purpose does "discussing the very real possibility" of a bio-terror attack serve?

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

I think post #112 is a good question for you to answer. I don't care about that troll. I want to talk about terrorism and biological weapons.

No, that's not what you want. I've already "answered" that post a number of times already.

 

[ChrisL]

Its at least as important as Sarah Palin's family life, which Ive seen discussed around here quite liberaly

I can promise you that you have not seen me discuss Sarah Palin.

But that's also completely missing the point. No one is claiming that a bio terror attack is "impossible". What is there to discuss when no one is disagreeing with the premise?

When you are trying to have a discussion about it, and some idiot comes by and says "it's ridiculous." That is pretty much disagreeing with the premise, is it not?

The problem is that the "premise" of this thread, and what OldSchool referred to as "ridiculous" is about Ebola as a bio-terror agent, not the idea of bio-terror attacks in general.

Could they purposely get infected jump on a plane and then spread the disease here.......Is that feasible?

Of course. But "feasibility" isn't the metric that I use to decide what to be afraid of. Almost anything is "feasible"

Like I said to you earlier, you don't have to be living in fear and hiding in a bomb shelter or something because you want to discuss the potential of a terrorist attack.

It really DOES seem like you afraid. Afraid to acknowledge that there is probably a very high likelihood that we WILL be attacked again eventually, we just don't know when, where or with what type of weapon.