Will there be a terrorist attack on

[cali]

the dear old "homeland" within the coming year?


Hillary brought it up by saying such an attack would aid the repukes, but I must say I've been pondering whether such an attack will happen. Without getting into the provenance of any such attack, what do you think?

[Independet_voter]

1. another option

You left out "could it happen". I think it's possible that it could and what scares me more than anything else about that is that our illustrious idiot president would use that as an excuse to declare martial law.

[sallyseven]

2. Yes he would. And I think he plans to.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Qui bono?

The only ones to benefit would be AQ and Bushco. AQ, because it would show that their (scary music) tentacles of evil can reach even into the heartland of America, gaining them recruits. Bushco, because it would re-emphasize that despite all their best efforts over the past five years, the (scary music) tentacles of evil can reach even into the heartland of America, gaining them recruits.

Unfortunately, our protestations that Bushco is not keeping us safe will have no resonance.

And since all it would take is one person with a modicum of imagination and a willingness to die for the cause, there wouldn't even need to be a huge conspiracy involving explosives that don't exist or frontal assaults on military bases. Frankly, nobody could keep us safe from a DC sniper type attack. The fact that there haven't been any is excellent evidence that there are no sleeper cells, no imported terrorists. But if it really looks like the Dems will take the WH, I think we'll see something because what AQ does NOT want for America is someone who can direct efficient and effective action against terrorists while keeping us out of oil wars.

[cali]

4. Well put and

I fear, dead on.

[rzemanfl]

5. Can't add to that, good post. n/t

[Fovea]

7. "our protestations that Bushco is not keeping us safe will have no resonance"

I could not disagree with this statement more.

I believe that another "terrorist" attack on the US would probably spark two things in rapid succession, assuming no coup by the Dems:

1. Martial law

2. Widespread insurrection.

I do not think that a federal government that cannot respond to a hurricane Katrina can stop dissolution of the US into warring factions.

Unlike the 19th century crisis, the geographic boundaries are far less clear. The second civil war could be a lot more like Lebanon than the American civil war V. 1.0. It could go on for generations.

Balkanization is a far better fate than that.

The Cheney admin only has the consent of about %18 of the governed at this point. I cannot see how it could sustain another massive failure to defend America against enemies foreign or domestic. Particularly true in light of our broken military with plenty of weapons, but very few boots on the home turf. Blackwell and CACI would quickly find brigandage more advantageous than serving Dick.

What that would leave is the Hatfields vs the McCoys writ horribly large, not a Republican victory, unless you are considering a Pyhrric victory as desirable.

Hillary's comment reveals to me the essential problem of many soi-disant leaders of my party. They lack the courage and will to actually lead.

[man4allcats]

6. I think it depends on whether

the Republicans think they can get away with it.