WMD Attack by 2013: Will Obama's Plan Prevent It?

  • News
  • Thread starter hammertime
  • Start date
In summary: This congressional report released in December 2008 stated that a terrorist attack using nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons could happen by 2013. The report stated that while progress had been made in securing these weapons, not enough was being made and our margin of security was shrinking. The report also stated that the terrorist attack could take place in one of the "most sinful, liberal parts of the Great Satan" - Los Angeles, California.
  • #1
hammertime
135
0
I don't know if you all heard, but there a Congressional committee on stopping proliferation of WMD's recently (right after the Mumbai attacks, I believe) released a report stating that we could expect a terrorist attack using either nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons by 2013. It stated that, while progress had been made in securing these weapons, not enough was being made and our margin of security was shrinking.

What do you think about all this? Are there any experts in the field here? Do you think this is real or is it fearmongering? And do you think President-Elect Obama can/will do enough to prevent it?

Me personally, I'm pretty apprehensive. I go to UCLA so I live in one of the biggest cities in the US. And think about it, what better place to attack than the most sinful, liberal part of the Great Satan? I mean, it is pretty far from the downtown area, but it's still one of the "posher" areas of LA. It's so depressing, as well as frightening. I mean, I'm almost done, only got a year left, and I'm REALLY looking forward to this huge 26-hour dance marathon in February. But I can't seem to stop thinking that I'll be dead by the end of the school year.

Come to think of it, what's to stop something like Mumbai from happening at the dance marathon? Thousands of young, idealistic college kids living their dreams out in an all-American college in one of the largest cities in America.

I don't know. Am I just being paranoid, or are these fears justified?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
At the moment, the probability that any specific event or location should become the target of a terrorist attack, is practically zero.

Sinfulness is in the eye of the beholder, who will see it wherever he is.

That SOME terrorist attack will happen in the next few years is, however, rather likely.
 
  • #3
Do you have a reference to this report telling us to expect such an attack within the next five years? If not, then all this is just speculation.
 
  • #4
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
More scare tactics to keep us edgy enough to allow MORE infringements upon our rights. Yee-haw.
 
  • #6
We have discussed this before. The number that I have seen is I think a 50% chance in the next ten years.

Has anyone ever seen the movie, Brazil? It is a tongue-in-cheek, retro-futuristic movie in which terrorist attacks are just a normal part of the daily routine.
 
  • #7
hammertime said:
I don't know. Am I just being paranoid, or are these fears justified?

If you live in fear, the terrorists win.

Be happy. Don't worry.
 
  • #8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2008

The other years aren't any better. I think things may be getting out of hand. :p

If you live in fear, the terrorists win.

Be happy. Don't worry.

Exactly. The most important thing anyone can do in dealing with terrorists is to show them how futile their cause is. When you surrender anything to them out of fear, you're inviting them to take more and more.
 
  • #9
Ivan Seeking said:
If you live in fear, the terrorists win.

Be happy. Don't worry.

If the terrorists accomplish their goals, the terrorists win. Fortunately, it's not likely they will:
http://www.schneier.com/essay-176.html
 
  • #10
The only thing I fear about terrorism is how our government responds to it. I used to be comfortable flying, but now the hoops we have to go through keep me away entirely. Not the fear of being flown into a building or blown up. Terrorists are an indirect nuisance.

They should be called nuisancists.
 
  • #11
hammertime said:
I don't know if you all heard, but there a Congressional committee on stopping proliferation of WMD's recently (right after the Mumbai attacks, I believe) released a report stating that we could expect a terrorist attack using either nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons by 2013. It stated that, while progress had been made in securing these weapons, not enough was being made and our margin of security was shrinking.

I don't know. Am I just being paranoid, or are these fears justified?
That's so broad as to be pretty useless. An actual nuclear bomb going off in Time Square is one thing - packets of anthrax mailed out to members of the media and government is quite another. Do you even remember that that happened in the months following 9/11? So you tell me: since their prediction has already come true, did you even remember it well enough to be afraid of it?
 
  • #12
hammertime said:
I don't know if you all heard, but there a Congressional committee on stopping proliferation of WMD's recently (right after the Mumbai attacks, I believe) released a report stating that we could expect a terrorist attack using either nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons by 2013. It stated that, while progress had been made in securing these weapons, not enough was being made and our margin of security was shrinking.

I don't know. Am I just being paranoid, or are these fears justified?

I haven't read the report but it sounds like fear mongering is at the core here. Even just the way they lump the use of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons into the same over all possibility sounds absurd. I mean if they lump hand guns in there too the headlines would read "Use of nuclear, biological, chemical or hand held weapons an absolute certainty in all major cities in the USA!"
 
  • #13
hammertime said:
I don't know if you all heard, but there a Congressional committee on stopping proliferation of WMD's recently (right after the Mumbai attacks, I believe) released a report stating that we could expect a terrorist attack using either nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons by 2013. It stated that, while progress had been made in securing these weapons, not enough was being made and our margin of security was shrinking.

What do you think about all this? Are there any experts in the field here? Do you think this is real or is it fearmongering? And do you think President-Elect Obama can/will do enough to prevent it?

Me personally, I'm pretty apprehensive. I go to UCLA so I live in one of the biggest cities in the US. And think about it, what better place to attack than the most sinful, liberal part of the Great Satan? I mean, it is pretty far from the downtown area, but it's still one of the "posher" areas of LA. It's so depressing, as well as frightening. I mean, I'm almost done, only got a year left, and I'm REALLY looking forward to this huge 26-hour dance marathon in February. But I can't seem to stop thinking that I'll be dead by the end of the school year.

Come to think of it, what's to stop something like Mumbai from happening at the dance marathon? Thousands of young, idealistic college kids living their dreams out in an all-American college in one of the largest cities in America.

I don't know. Am I just being paranoid, or are these fears justified?

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2011918&postcount=41

Did you read the or scan the report? The report provides several recommendations. What do you think?
 

1. What is a WMD attack?

A WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) attack is an act of using weapons that are capable of causing widespread destruction and death, such as nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.

2. What is Obama's plan to prevent a WMD attack by 2013?

Obama's plan to prevent a WMD attack by 2013 involved strengthening international non-proliferation efforts, securing vulnerable nuclear materials, and enhancing intelligence and detection capabilities.

3. Has Obama's plan been successful in preventing a WMD attack by 2013?

There have been no reported WMD attacks in 2013, suggesting that Obama's plan may have been successful in preventing such an attack. However, it is difficult to determine the direct impact of his plan as there are many factors that can contribute to preventing a WMD attack.

4. What measures are in place to prevent a WMD attack by 2013?

In addition to Obama's plan, there are several measures in place to prevent a WMD attack by 2013, including increased security at borders and ports, international treaties and agreements, and improved intelligence and surveillance techniques.

5. What can individuals do to help prevent a WMD attack by 2013?

Individuals can play a role in preventing a WMD attack by being vigilant and reporting any suspicious activities or behavior. They can also support international non-proliferation efforts and advocate for stronger measures to prevent the spread of WMDs.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top