But my point is, Tom, that it really wouldn't take a heck of a lot of money or even organization to mount a pretty effective campaign of terror in the US.
When I was a kid there was a sect in the area where I grew up known as "Doukhobors", originally religious refugees from Russia, who objected to a lot of what the Canadian system was imposing on them. They used simple dynamite and matches and wreaked considerable havoc on schools and power lines, despite the best efforts of the RCMP and private security. This was realy just a tiny, localized group but it had a significant effect.
It seems to me that "international terrorists" have goals that don't really include terrorizing the general population of the US. And the US Govt, in it's war on terrorism, has goals that don't really include safeguarding said general population.
Current Events » in reply to Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
The whole thread (38 posts)
- On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- While you ask a very good question
- Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- Re: On terrorism - or the lack thereof
- The gang that couldn't shoot straight
- I thought you'd never ask
