I'm torn. On the one hand I think that perhaps this new awareness of the importance of rail transport is a good thing. On the other hand, an attack against Amtrak and the resulting ridership drop could be just what the administration needs to justify killing it. Nooo, that conspiracy theory is too unspeakably evil for even me to contemplate.
Mr. Toy Member # 311
posted
Wherever we get attacked next, it'll be someplace we're not looking. This goes a little off topic, but I suspect the terrorists aim to drag our economy down the tubes by forcing us to pay big bucks to protect everything to the hilt. Sorta like Reagan helped bankrupt the Soviet Union with an arms race.
Boyce Member # 2719
posted
Shortly after 9/11 Dan Rather quoted a Mid-East proverb that "revenge is best served cold." I think an attack will come in another 2 or 3 years. However, this is not to say that we shouldn't be vigilant 'til then.
M190 Member # 3009
posted
That's a very good point Mr. Toy. I've thought also that the next attack they would plan would be something not done before and therefore not foreseen and almost impossible to prepare for. Tightening up security in an infrastructure that has already been hit seems a bit like closing the barn door after the horse is out, but we can't very well NOT do that either.
rresor Member # 128
posted
I don't want to trivialize the danger, by any means, but people certainly have short memories. Recall that the Baader-Meinhof "gang" sought to provoke West Germany into undemocratic crackdowns in the 1970s by planting lots of bombs. It didn't work then, W. Germany did not become a totalitarian state, and its economy was not wrecked.
I doubt the Middle Eastern terrorists have either the resources or the detailed knowledge possessed by Baader-Meinhof, so I don't anticipate a great deal of trouble from them. Neither do I expect our (much larger) economy will be destroyed.
The most difficult thing we have to put up with is the sheer silliness of many of the current security precautions.
posted