Terror. Does anyone care?

I wasn't in the slightest affected by 9/11 or the war in Afghanistan or Iraq or any of it. I suppose I have our brave military men and women who risk their lives to keep me safe at night to thanks, but politically I am completely apathetic and more concerned with not getting run over by a car, unluckily being diagnosed with a terminal illness or falling down a staircase and breaking my neck or some other random tragedy than being a victim of a terror attack.

i'm kinda pissed off that the debt is going up - it means when a democrat gets elected i'll end up having to pay for all this shit.  outside of that, nope, don't give a fuck

I smile and laugh every time an American dies due to "terrorism."

>>2 Bush's tax cuts where absolute fail. When you spend... You indirectly tax, so once again humans devours a short-term treat in favor of a happy, stable future. I quote from the brilliant c2ore.com... "The true national debt is $49 trillion, not the $8.3 trillion Bush reported.
      That's $156,000 for every citizen, or $375,000 for every working American. This figure has more than doubled in the past five years.
     We paid $327 billion last year on interest alone. The true 2005 deficit was $760 billion, not the $318.5 billion Bush reported.
       This is 6.2% of the GDP, not 2.6%. What accounts for the huge discrepancy? Unlike businesses, the government uses "cash" instead of "accrual" accounting. This means that the government does not report future spending promises like Medicare and Social Security, or even future spending guarantees like veterans' benefits and federal employee pensions." Now, if somehow Tokyo is levelled in the inevitable earthquake (economy goes bazookas) and the global warming cycle starts to speed up due to a new factor (release of methane from eroding soil layers et al.) I'm moving to arctica lickety-split. I'm not blaming it on Bushitler (I blame christianists and neo-jacobins for turning the GOP into a soggy pile of gerbil shit) or whatever, nor am I expecting a cornucopia of competence from the dems but *seriously*, we are heading for baaaad times.

>>4
Enjoy your kool aid.

>>4
" Bush's tax cuts where absolute fail. When you spend... You indirectly tax, so once again humans devours a short-term treat in favor of a happy, stable future. I quote from the brilliant c2ore.com... "The true national debt is $49 trillion, not the $8.3 trillion Bush reported.
      That's $156,000 for every citizen, or $375,000 for every working American. This figure has more than doubled in the past five years.
     We paid $327 billion last year on interest alone. The true 2005 deficit was $760 billion, not the $318.5 billion Bush reported.
       This is 6.2% of the GDP, not 2.6%. What accounts for the huge discrepancy? Unlike businesses, the government uses "cash" instead of "accrual" accounting. This means that the government does not report future spending promises like Medicare and Social Security, or even future spending guarantees like veterans' benefits and federal employee pensions." Now, if somehow Tokyo is levelled in the inevitable earthquake (economy goes bazookas) and the global warming cycle starts to speed up due to a new factor (release of methane from eroding soil layers et al.) I'm moving to arctica lickety-split. I'm not blaming it on Bushitler (I blame christianists and neo-jacobins for turning the GOP into a soggy pile of gerbil shit) or whatever, nor am I expecting a cornucopia of competence from the dems but *seriously*, we are heading for baaaad times."

I think this explains at least some of your figures.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-24-retiree-taxpayers_x.htm

>>1
I wasn't worried about terror until recently, now I just worry if this war on terror is just provoking more of it for the future. Its still incredably rare, at the moment you probably should be more worried about getting run over by a car. People in the west clearly haven't got enough to worry about.

The war on terror ended a long time ago, in my opinion. Now they're just beating a dead horse. And sodomizing it, too.

>>8
the war on terrorism will realistically never end. that's the thing about fighting an 'ism, you're going to war to eliminate an idea and mind set. there will always be redically revolutionaries, those who disagree with their government so much that they're willing to go up in arms about this.

this is both good and bad depending. america was raised upon a revolution, as were many countires. there's a phrase that 'one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter'. this is true in almost all instances, because the terrorist is always seeking the betterment of his people, even if that process is violent, he belives it to be necessery.

because of this, we will never stop fighting this war as it exists now, as a war on an 'ism. we will never snipe some middle eastern man, clap the dust off our hands, and say "whelp, that's the last of 'em."

>>6 Soc. Sec. isn't the fucking problem Mrs. Harris. Medicare and poor economic policies are. Privatizing Soc. Sec. in the suggested manner would be an absolute disaster, just like in Chile.
>>9 I guess America should continue exerting its soft power instead of fighting in such a bullying manner. It should never have attacked Iraq, and it definetely should have handled the war on (more like prevention of) terror a lot better.

>>10  So slash medicare then.  Some programs obviously need to be cut.

Terrorism is not real problem anyway. Only one strike. Pathetic. If there was weekly bombings then we should start considering some measures, but otherwise just forget about it.

>>11 Unlike authoritarians, I'm not much for ruining a system in order to force a society to leave it and those that depend on it behind. There will be no slashing - incremental removal is another story.

>>13 Did you read the link? What are you going to do when there is no more money in the pot to fund your wonderful programs? You are going to *have* to slash them at some point.  The conservatives merely have the foresight to cut spending before the problem arises.

>>13
By the way, just to make sure we aren't confused, when I say 'slash', I don't mean 'eliminate completely right away in the next ten seconds.'  I favor 'incremental removal' as well, so long as removal *is* on the agenda at some point. 

>>14 "The conservatives merely have the foresight to cut spending before the problem arises." Yeah, well, they take aim at Soc. Sec. because they know that companies don't want to offer health care anymore. They care more about their idea of 'America' than about actual Americans. Also - http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/social_security/index.html These people are real heroes - aiming for objective truth is always more impressive than standing by big ideals and having a rigid heart - http://www.truthaboutsocialsecurity.com/description/index.html Listen, I dislike the government because empirical evidence shows that it is usually worse than the market - but the current American right doesn't know how to privatize.

>>16
Right, and the left is no better because they will screw with the market to such an extent that more public programs are necessary.  Then the right screws with the programs so that sweeping privatization is necessary.  Both are wrong, but the right is at least right in that we shouldn't screw with what we have that we know works - what is left of the market (outside of health care which as we all know as been fucked up).

>>12

Exactly.  Terrorism should be treated as a serious concern; however, the success of the 9/11 attacks should not be treated as the true scope of that concern.  The 9/11 attackers were extraordinarily lucky and aided by incompetant homeland security.  Nothing like it will ever happen again (until suitcase nukes are readily available), and spending 700 billion annually on our defense budget has very little to do with the reason we have not been attacked on US soil since 2001.

"Right, and the left is no better because they will screw with the market to such an extent that more public programs are necessary." The market has been king since Reagan convinced the public that taking vacations and sticking together against those that are stronger and meaner than you is for communists.
"Both are wrong, but the right is at least right in that we shouldn't screw with what we have that we know works - what is left of the market (outside of health care which as we all know as been fucked up)." The health care insurance system started raping its clients on its own accord. The market is incredibly strong in America - wages are falling, benefits are dropping like leaves, outsourcing, union-busting, less vacations and regressive taxation. The only country that is more laissez-faire would be Switzerland and SUI isn't a country - it's a sect.
>>18 They weren't aided by squat - They didn't actually do it.

>>19
"The health care insurance system started raping its clients on its own accord."

WRONG.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul345.html

Government intervened, fucked up the market, and now you want to nationalize the industry that ONCE worked well, before the government decided to fuck with it. 

Satellites can detect suitcase nukes.

>>21
IN SOVIET RUSSIA SUITCASE NUKES CAN DETECT SATELLITES!

Since You Dont Care, Die.