9-11 Commission members say the gov't deserves "dismal grade" for enacting recommended reforms
I wish I could say that I am surprised by truthfully I am not. We have enacted some of the things, but the problem is that a lot of the things we are doing probably don't make us any safer, they just waste time and money. Much of the added screenings in airports is largely ineffective. In a sense we are patching up the pasture fence after the cows have already escaped, but sense it looks like we are at least doing something then we go ahead and do it.
I personally, and many experts as well, are far more worried about someone unleasing a NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) attack somewhere in the US. Most of our nuclear and chemical plants are very poorly guarded against a terrorist attack. By the time help would arrive in the event of such an attack, it would be over and the damage likely done. Consider the trouble our country had responding to a hurricane that we knew was on the way, how would we respond if someone set off a nuke in a large city and thousands died instantly with thousands more injured? After seeing the devastation of Katrina, I am very concerned on how we would handle such an event. We have spend a ton of money on homeland security and without a doubt there have been some great success stories (and yes I am keeping in mind that by their nature we may not here of many of them) we can and should be doing much better.
Check out the link below to read the story on yahoo via ap, there is a link at the bottom of that page to read the actual report by the group, which is now continuing its work with private funding.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051203/ap_on_re_us/sept11_commission;_ylt=AuAfXKPVlUZ08zY5QeNODetvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
I personally, and many experts as well, are far more worried about someone unleasing a NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) attack somewhere in the US. Most of our nuclear and chemical plants are very poorly guarded against a terrorist attack. By the time help would arrive in the event of such an attack, it would be over and the damage likely done. Consider the trouble our country had responding to a hurricane that we knew was on the way, how would we respond if someone set off a nuke in a large city and thousands died instantly with thousands more injured? After seeing the devastation of Katrina, I am very concerned on how we would handle such an event. We have spend a ton of money on homeland security and without a doubt there have been some great success stories (and yes I am keeping in mind that by their nature we may not here of many of them) we can and should be doing much better.
Check out the link below to read the story on yahoo via ap, there is a link at the bottom of that page to read the actual report by the group, which is now continuing its work with private funding.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051203/ap_on_re_us/sept11_commission;_ylt=AuAfXKPVlUZ08zY5QeNODetvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
posted by bigalsbeans at 1:57 AM
1 Comments:
America seems to be good at fighting the last war rather than the next one. It is unlikely that hijacking planes to use as missiles will work again, so Al Qaeda is likely to try something different next time. Katrina gave us another example of communication problems making response to a disaster much more difficult. Portable radios with long-lasting batteries are needed for all law enforcement agencies.
Post a Comment
<< Home