Color Alerts

Color Alerts - Politics, Business, Civil, History - Posted: 5th Aug, 2004 - 8:46pm

Text RPG Play Text RPG ?
 

Posts: 8 - Views: 861
In the USA
Post Date: 1st Aug, 2004 - 11:30pm / Post ID: #

Avatar

Color Alerts

U.S. security chief: Financial centers in New York, D.C. and northern N.J. on high terror alert because of new threats.
Ref. CNN.com

Does the Amber, Yellow and other color and level alerts in the US change the way you do things, or does it affect the way you do business, run your daily life activities, etc.?

Sponsored Links:
2nd Aug, 2004 - 12:06am / Post ID: #

Alerts Color

No, it hasnt affected me and how I go through my daily activities. I do realize that the events of 9-11 has forced us to be more aware and not as complacent, but I also believe that it should not dictate how we live our lives.


International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 ActivistPoliticianEnvoy 24.1%


2nd Aug, 2004 - 11:24am / Post ID: #

Color Alerts History & Civil Business Politics

It doesn't change how I live my life, but it definitely has increased the tension in my life. I keep waiting for the next event, and am surprised every day when it doesn't happen.


International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 ActivistPoliticianInternational Guru 85.4%


2nd Aug, 2004 - 2:05pm / Post ID: #

Alerts Color

Because we have gone to Orange so many times without any evidence that any threat really was thwarted, I pretty much ignore this stuff. I have heard suggestions that many attacks have been thwarted and that we are not being told about it because they don't want to panic us. If this is true, I think it is a mistake. We are better off seeing that the system is working than assuming that these elevations are all for naught.

The warning system doesn't affect how I live my life, but the threat of terror in general does. I am unlikely to fly between now and the election, for example. On certain big occasions, I avoid the big public gatherings surrounding them. That sort of thing.

Reconcile Edited: tenaheff on 2nd Aug, 2004 - 2:07pm


International Level: Diplomat / Political Participation: 320 ActivistPoliticianDiplomat 32%


Post Date: 5th Aug, 2004 - 4:04am / Post ID: #

Color Alerts
A Friend

Alerts Color

If the terror alert recommended a specific course of action for people in my area (suburban Chicago) I would likely follow it, but that hasn't happened so I would have to say that raising the color from yellow to orange has no effect on me whatsoever -- other than discussing it as a security or political issue in a forum like this.

I realize that my chances of getting killed or injured by a terrorist attack in the United States is very minimal compared to any number of commonplace hazards likely to befall me. For example, more than 10 times as many Americans die in automobile accidents every year as perished on 9/11. The threat of terrorism should be a major concern for all citizens, but I think the climate of fear has been blown out of proportion. Remember when store shelves were stripped of plastic sheeting and duct tape, and some people started sealing their homes? I'm not sure the savings on heating bills was worth the panic.

My greatest concern regarding a potential terrorist attack is the possibility that terrorists might obtain and smuggle a nuclear device into the country. No other kind of attack could be nearly as lethal. We have to revive and strengthen the efforts to secure the nuclear materials of the former Soviet Union, and do a much better job of inspecting shipping containers and securing our ports. In my opinion, the tens of billions of dollars being spent on an unproven missile shield would be much better spent addressing the more likely scenarios of nuclear attack.

5th Aug, 2004 - 6:30pm / Post ID: #

Color Alerts

I tend to agree with MartinEden about the nuclear concerns, with a few exceptions.

While I suspect it is possible (probable) that terrorists and/or foreign powers could have smuggled nuclear devices into the US, when it comes to real devastation, it would be much more "productive" (destructive) for them to use biological or chemical weapons. While they could get a nuclear explosive (or a few) into place, it is unlikely that they would be able to get enough in to really seriously hurt the nation. But with chemical or biological weapons, they might not need as much physical material to cause the devastation. It would probably be much easier for them to attack many different places.

Of course, either way would cause massive panic.

And, I also agree that with the upgrading of alert levels should come specific advice and instructions about how to deal with the problems.


International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 ActivistPoliticianInternational Guru 85.4%


Make sure to SUBSCRIBE for FREE to JB's Youtube Channel!
5th Aug, 2004 - 6:40pm / Post ID: #

Color Alerts

While I agree that any nuclear weapon would have to be small. I think it would still serve as an incredible terror tactic. First, we are all conditioned to be extremely afraid of anything nuclear. Second, there will be secondary radiation to worry about. Third, once they have established that they can get their hands on nuclear weapons and use them, we will be scared out of our minds about future, larger attacks.

As far as biological attacks. I am less afraid of that. I think they have a better chance of getting a small dirty bomb than they do small pox. Of course, this is just all my opinion, for whatever that may be worth.


International Level: Diplomat / Political Participation: 320 ActivistPoliticianDiplomat 32%


Post Date: 5th Aug, 2004 - 8:46pm / Post ID: #

NOTE: News [?]

Color Alerts Politics Business Civil & History

This is a question that we have faced every time there is a new development in the war on terrorism. Okay, what do we do now? A warning that something may happen, somewhere, sometime. So do I change my habits? Run for the hills? The pattern has become somewhat routine. There is an announcement, and a flurry of activity. That happened with the announcement this past weekend of new information and specific targets, or possible specific targets in the U.S. Then, as time goes on, more information comes out. Some of that new information turned out to be years old. Okay, do I breathe a sigh of relief? But then comes the report that al Qaeda routinely does surveillance on possible targets for years before striking. So much for my sigh of relief.

This is a question that we have faced every time there is a new development in the war on terrorism. Okay, what do we do now? A warning that something may happen, somewhere, sometime. So do I change my habits? Run for the hills? The pattern has become somewhat routine. There is an announcement, and a flurry of activity. That happened with the announcement this past weekend of new information and specific targets, or possible specific targets in the U.S. Then, as time goes on, more information comes out. Some of that new information turned out to be years old. Okay, do I breathe a sigh of relief? But then comes the report that al Qaeda routinely does surveillance on possible targets for years before striking. So much for my sigh of relief.

Ref. Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff ABC News Washington Bureau


 
> TOPIC: Color Alerts
 

▲ TOP


International Discussions Coded by: BGID®
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Copyright © 1999-2024
Disclaimer Privacy Report Errors Credits
This site uses Cookies to dispense or record information with regards to your visit. By continuing to use this site you agree to the terms outlined in our Cookies used here: Privacy / Disclaimer,