05-07-2008, 02:14 PM
|
#21
|
Norm!
|
I think if we're talking about environmental terrorist groups, then yes the Oilsands would be a pretty juicy target, especially something that causes wide spread environmental damage to illustrate a point.
But it would probably be more effective for them to start blowing up pumping stations or pipelines, but the best target in my mind would be to blow up a natural gas or oil freighter.
If we're talking Islamic terrorists, then attacking the oilsands or infrastructure that has to do with Oil exploration and production would probably be fairly easy, but it wouldn't have the effect that they want, there aren't enough casualties. However in terms of strategy, blowing up a soft target like a damn would certainly distract security arrangements elsewhere making a bigger target slightly easier to get at.
If I was a terrorist with a limited budget, I would cart a couple of grenades into the dome during a hockey game, you could probably kill several hundred people in several seconds.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 02:26 PM
|
#22
|
Mullet Face
|
^ thats a scary thought man. I'd much rather hear about some oil sand dam getting hit then several thousands of pple dying at some big event
Canada will get hit one day.. sooner or later. I just pray that we are well prepared for such a disaster.
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 02:42 PM
|
#23
|
Norm!
|
I think with Canada's role in Afghanistan, its place in the world as a close friend of the U.S. and Britian, its prominent role in the UN, and the fact that Canada has become more aggressive militarily, its only a matter of time until we get hit. Personally the local nut ball terrorists groups that camp out on the weekend and plan glorious roads to martyrdom are not the threat, they talk to much, they have bad security and they seem to get caught. But with our immigration policy and weak border patrols, its more then likely that we have more then one professional, trained terrorist living in Canada right now writing up a target list, and these guys are paranoid about their security. The guys that live here for 10 or 15 years taking their time, gathering their resources and being target selective are the effective ones.
Think of the terrorists that hit night clubs instead of going for a high value target, or the terrorists that avoid going after political targets to go after soft targets like schools or markets or malls. Thats what we're going to see.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 02:48 PM
|
#24
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: I'm right behind you
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemmer
Canada will get hit one day.. sooner or later. I just pray that we are well prepared for such a disaster.
|
Well prepared, how? By having enough body bags on hand?
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 02:52 PM
|
#25
|
Mullet Face
|
Well if say something like 9/11 happened in Canada or an LRT underground station got bombed like Madrid.. how would our emergency response be? Hard to say cuz nothing like that has happened here
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 03:12 PM
|
#26
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post!
|
Calgary (and Alberta) would be a soft target, and not a likely one. These sorts of attacks tend to be planned in places with more of a central presence for mass effect - London, New York City, Madrid, Nairobi, etc...Toronto, Montreal, or Ottawa would probably be most at risk, and would make more of a statement than poisoning a North Albertan river with toxins.
I think this is just more paranoia being spun. Security is always a risk, but how we're going to link a toxic pond with dead wildlife produced by a company that benefits from the tar sands, and an international terrorist network that is looking to bring down buildings and oil refineries just seems a bit too far-fetched to me.
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 03:16 PM
|
#27
|
Norm!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Calgary (and Alberta) would be a soft target, and not a likely one. These sorts of attacks tend to be planned in places with more of a central presence for mass effect - London, New York City, Madrid, Nairobi, etc...Toronto, Montreal, or Ottawa would probably be most at risk, and would make more of a statement than poisoning a North Albertan river with toxins.
I think this is just more paranoia being spun. Security is always a risk, but how we're going to link a toxic pond with dead wildlife produced by a company that benefits from the tar sands, and an international terrorist network that is looking to bring down buildings and oil refineries just seems a bit too far-fetched to me.
|
I agree with you for the most part, except that Calgary with a population of a million, which is a major media center with a lot of Canadian Head Offices especially in the energy field would probably be a prime target, especially with the population density based around down town.
It wouldn't have to be a major terrorist strike for it to have a massive effect on this country.
Like I mentioned before, the type of terrorists that would go after the oil sands or something like that would be the homespun variety and probably with an environmental slant.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 03:41 PM
|
#28
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
This "security expert" doesn't sound like he's got much expertise in anything other than cooking up kooky and unlikely plots.
And I don't mean to underestimate the persuasiveness of the terrorist leaders, but you'd have a hell of a time convincing even the looniest religious fanatic to kill himself by flying an airplane into some obscure thing like "Refuse Site 9B-8" that is a thousand miles from the nearest television set. He wouldn't even be killing any heathens.
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 03:45 PM
|
#29
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
This "security expert" doesn't sound like he's got much expertise in anything other than cooking up kooky and unlikely plots.
And I don't mean to underestimate the persuasiveness of the terrorist leaders, but you'd have a hell of a time convincing even the looniest religious fanatic to kill himself by flying an airplane into some obscure thing like "Refuse Site 9B-8" that is a thousand miles from the nearest television set. He wouldn't even be killing any heathens.
|
Exactly.
And how many people really know about Calgary's corporate base? Not many, I imagine, except those who have are involved in the community. I don't suspect the terrorists would be all that keen on doing research on whether Imperial is located in Calgary or Toronto anymore; they'd be more interested in taking out a government building, or a mass transit system, the likes of which Calgary pales in comparison to the other Canadian metropolii.
|
|
|
05-07-2008, 03:53 PM
|
#30
|
Wucka Wocka Wacka
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East of the Rockies, West of the Rest
|
If a terrorist group wanted the US out of the middle east, why would they disrupt the north american supply of oil? It would just make middle eastern oil more valuable and further entrench the US' interests there.
Plus, it would not create mass psychological impact nor casualties. Not to say we should not be vigilant though...but I think the risk/reward payoff for that kind of attack would be low.
__________________
"WHAT HAVE WE EVER DONE TO DESERVE THIS??? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US????" -Oiler Fan
"It was a debacle of monumental proportions." -MacT
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 AM.
|
|