What is Digg?17 Comments
- Waiting2awake, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5You are dead already. At least from the neck up considering your thoughts on this.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4You missed the whole point I was trying to bring up about what MOTIVE they would have to attack us in the first place. People do not spend millions of dollars and risk their lives to nuke a foreign city simply because their borders were unsecure.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4That comment was so asinine I thought it was pure sarcasm. Please read the following article to dispel that myth that we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vuk/vuk19.html - Waiting2awake, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3after the last 6 years - the only conspiracy people are those still defending the party line.
What are you going to do when the truth gets out to the average person? When the average person realizes that their savings are gone, or if not gone worthless. When the food is no longer available, or what is is contaminated with hormones, chemicals and toxicants? They are going to want blood, and those that actually did this are shut away in their gated communities guarded by blackwater - people will start to look at who they can get - and they will see those enablers, those people that helped the ignorance continue and it is them that they will go after... - inactive, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Let's assume for a moment that our government did actually base their policy on the cost/benefit analysis you described, rather than to implement their globalist agenda at any and all cost. Tell me what benefit do we have from spending $3 Trillion on Iraq and thousands of dead and wounded American soldiers?
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Yawn, this is 1950's red scare stuff just barely warmed over......
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Do you really believe the terrorists would attack America with another 9-11 attack simply because we elected socialist leaders (whom the terrorists endorse anyway), versus the neo-con globalist puppets who are in both major parties who will launch all the unjust imperialistic wars as necessary for their Master Plan?
- inactive, on 04/16/2008, -5/+7Why is it "inevitable", or at least highly likely that a nuclear device will be detonated in an American city, but is not so likely to happen in China, or Russia, or Spain, or France, or Germany, or Mexico, or Canada, or Japan, or Argentina, or Cuba, or Switzerland? Could it have something to do with our screwed up foreign policy?
Also, if there is such a high chance of a nuclear attack on American soil, what some believe is "inevitable", why don't we secure our borders? Obviously even since 9-11 our government is not concerned about the security of America to protect us from terrorists, but is more concerned with the security of America to protect the treasonous elite from the American people. The treasonous globalism elitists are merely using things like the Patriot Act and Department of Homeland Security for more power and control of we the people. - swizzcheez, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Based on that map, I'm spending all my Washington time at the Lincoln Memorial (just SW of the 10% casualty zone). I might glow, but I won't be hurtin'!
- inboxnews, on 04/16/2008, -2/+3"...what some believe is "inevitable", why don't we secure our borders?"
Never happen. This is why it is inevitable. - Look4Truth, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2This is the mentality of brain washed America and needs to stop. The left/right, Democrat/Republican globalist creation is a false paradigm used to keep people divided and fighting each other while the establishment conquers everyone. Frankly, those comments make me nauseous. The idiot box rules the day, how sad.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1Spoken like one of the founding members of the Tin Foil Hat Brigade.
Power to the People!! Long live the TFHB!!! /sarcasm - CaptainAmerica1, on 04/16/2008, -3/+2There's this practice called a "cost/benefit" and "risk assessment" analysis. And during the analysis, you figure out if spending "X" dollars to gain "X" benefit is worth it, based on the overall risk of something bad happening if you don't do whatever it is you're considering doing, like securing the border.
Right now, it wouldn't be worth spending the money (likely to be many trillions) required to secure every inch of the north, south, east, and west borders of the United States because the risk of something bad happening is low. Although the risk is low, it will never be "zero." So, it's inevitable that something bad will happen sometime in the future. That future may be 5 minutes from now, or 50 years...but there is still a risk. - kingygk, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2It will be Inevitable if this country keeps electing socialist democrats like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama into office.
- nesmith82, on 04/16/2008, -2/+0Sounds like positive thinking!
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1And, of course -- George Bush will be blamed for not "connecting the dots" of the events leading up to it.
Conspiracy theorists will be convinced Bush detonated the device.
Conspiracy theorists will be convinced Halliburton will be awarded no-compete contracts for reconstruction.
Reverend Wright will be convinced that the device was detonated as a plot by whites "to exterminate the black man"
Conspiracy theorists will be convinced that videos and photos of the aftermath were fake and/or Photoshopped. - aa1voice, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2I can tell you this... as long as were are kicking their asses over there it wont happen. As soon as the Democrats surrender in the middle east it will be inevitable. Take the fight to them. Thank God for the Reagans and Bushes of the world. If Algore or John Kerry (who served in Vietnam) were elected we'd be dead already.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is