The journey from there to here

So, they had an emergency awareness training for certain people within our county.

The idea is this: millions of federal dollars spent in a rural Texas Panhandle county (population: 23,000) to address possible terror threats. Based on the assumption that we will be a primary target of terrorists.

Believe it or not, folks, every county in the nation has a list of reasons why it "would be a primary terror target". But most of them are wrong.

While a terror attack in the heartland might possibly impact the nation's food supplu, the impact would, in fact, be negligible. The resources needed to impact the millions of acres of farmland in the heartland would be far better spent in major urban areas, where higher human casualty rates are likely. Because we, as Americans, are affected by a loss of life. We're not affected by a loss of resources. And the terrorists know this.

Suppose there were a terror attack in the heartland. Can you imagine a headline decrying the loss of millions of bushels of wheat carrying the same impact as the loss of 3,000 lives? In real life terms, were we affected more by the fall of the Twin Towers on 9/11 or by the loss of 3,000 lives? If the former, why does a building's demolition not emotionally crush us.

Despite our extremely materialistic leanings, at our core, and in our hearts, we realize that things can be replaced. People cannot. And so, the heartland will never represent a serious target for foreign terrorists. Domestic terrorists might see it as a target, but let's face it: we like our home pizza delivery far too much for the Tim McVeighs and the Eric Rudolphs of this world to ever pose a substantial threat to this nation's security.

The spending of vast amounts of federal (read: money involuntarily extricated from your pockets and mine) monies on securing the heartland against foreign terrorism is, in fact, pork of the highest magnitude. But it's pork that, sadly, the majority of Americans either don't care about or blindly see as money well spent.


Comments
on Aug 03, 2005
It is also payback for voting republican so consistently.
on Aug 03, 2005
I think in terms of emotional impact, hitting rural areas would be greater than bombing NYC or London. You attack New Yorkers and they get PISSED OFF. Londoners withstood The Blitz for years and kept on trucking. Those people are tough as nails. But take your average farmer or just anyone that isn't living in a major urban area. They sit around and think they're impervious... that they're so insignificant that no terrorist would bother with them. So despite the anger over 9/11, most people still felt pretty safe. 9/11 did more to get people pissed at terrorism than however much actual terror was caused.

Take all those people who are blissfully sitting there in Podunk, WI thinking they're safe and secure because they're so unimportant. Hit them. All you have to do is hit a few small towns and suddenly NO ONE feels safe. Terrorism, if it remains confined to major urban areas, may get more deaths per incident, but the demoralization that is the aim will always be negligable. As it stands now, most people think "Could never happen to me" and thus the aims of terrorism are largely defeated.

This focus on major cities is proof that these bozos don't have the first clue of who they're dealing with. They want to scare us, but they attack our most hardened cities. You don't set off a bomb in London if you want to spark mass panic.
on Aug 03, 2005

I must respectfully differ, zoomba. The perception is actually the opposite. To illustrate this, I will compare the OKC bombing and Sept 11th.

When the Murrah federal building was bombed, we all sympathized with the victims. We all commisserated, we all prayed for them. But it didn't force us to feel vulnerable in our own homes.

9/11, by contrast, shook the world. Trust me, as a resident of "Podunk, WI", on September 11, 2001, we DID feel vulnerable. Every last one of us.

on Aug 03, 2005
I mean rural attacks combined with the major urban ones... urban is spectacular, rural proves that "Hey, I could be hit too" OKC was also a federal building, and attacking "The Govt" doesn't scare people as much as hitting true civilian targets. OKC was also assumed to be isolated, which helped people get past it fast.

OKC and 9/11 were two very different attacks with very different results not entirely related to where they were. One involved a bomb, the other involved two huge airplanes flying into buildings. One was a federal building, the other an office building. One was the work of a few lone domestic nut-jobs, the other of a carefully laid-out and executed plan of a foreign group.

I lived in Podunk, PA when the shit hit the fan, and it was anger and a sense of relief that we were far from any targets that washed over us. Fear that we were in danger in particular was one of the furthest things from our minds.