|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Feb 23, 2006 10:13:06 GMT -8
If a ship is intended to function as a delivery platform for an explosive device, searching the vessel in an American port does not prevent the adversary from fulfilling his task of penetrating American security and entering an American port. Indeed, the only safe point is in the port of departure, whether its in Japan, Saudi Arabia, or France. It would then prove most productive to submit vessels destined for America to searches in these locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 10:17:54 GMT -8
Ships are already searched (or are supposed to be) before they enter US harbors.
Searching them at the ports they leave from is a waste of resources.
How does it stop ships from stopping at another port and taking on terrorist supplies?
Ships should be searched by American authorities when they get to America. Before that I don't care what happens cause it doesn't matter. It doesn't make us any safer at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Feb 23, 2006 10:25:27 GMT -8
Ships are already searched (or are supposed to be) before they enter US harbors. Searching them at the ports they leave from is a waste of resources. How does it stop ships from stopping at another port and taking on terrorist supplies? Ships should be searched by American authorities when they get to America. Before that I don't care what happens cause it doesn't matter. It doesn't make us any safer at all. No FF searching and securing cargo from the port of embarkation is the smart thing to do. |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Feb 23, 2006 10:36:22 GMT -8
James-
Searching in an American port is useless. If an explosive device is on board a vessel, the terrorists have already accomplished the task of entering an American harbor. If we search the vessel in a foreign country, we can prevent that from occuring. And, if on the off chance the explosive device explodes during the inspection, it will not be in an American city. The purpose of a cargo vessel is to serve as a delivery platform. Once it enters an American port, it has succeeded in its task. Any search then is futile and a competition against time.
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 10:47:06 GMT -8
James- Searching in an American port is useless. If an explosive device is on board a vessel, the terrorists have already accomplished the task of entering an American harbor. If we search the vessel in a foreign country, we can prevent that from occuring. And, if on the off chance the explosive device explodes during the inspection, it will not be in an American city. The purpose of a cargo vessel is to serve as a delivery platform. Once it enters an American port, it has succeeded in its task. Any search then is futile and a competition against time. American ships aren't searched IN the harbor - they are supposed to be searched miles away from shore. How does your plan account for the fact that a ship could easily be searched in Basra but then sail to Cairo and take on terrorist weapons before heading to NYC? Your plan just makes America more dangerous by shifting resources away from the homeland and diverting them to a plan that does absolutely nothing to make us safer. |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 10:47:34 GMT -8
Ships are already searched (or are supposed to be) before they enter US harbors. Searching them at the ports they leave from is a waste of resources. How does it stop ships from stopping at another port and taking on terrorist supplies? Ships should be searched by American authorities when they get to America. Before that I don't care what happens cause it doesn't matter. It doesn't make us any safer at all. No FF searching and securing cargo from the port of embarkation is the smart thing to do. Can someone tell me why? Again, how does this stop a ship from going somewhere else and picking up weapons? |
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Feb 23, 2006 10:48:32 GMT -8
James- Searching in an American port is useless. If an explosive device is on board a vessel, the terrorists have already accomplished the task of entering an American harbor. If we search the vessel in a foreign country, we can prevent that from occuring. And, if on the off chance the explosive device explodes during the inspection, it will not be in an American city. The purpose of a cargo vessel is to serve as a delivery platform. Once it enters an American port, it has succeeded in its task. Any search then is futile and a competition against time. American ships aren't searched IN the harbor - they are supposed to be searched miles away from shore. How does your plan account for the fact that a ship could easily be searched in Basra but then sail to Cairo and take on terrorist weapons before heading to NYC? Your plan just makes America more dangerous by shifting resources away from the homeland and diverting them to a plan that does absolutely nothing to make us safer. It isn't his plan FF and it is what we do now. |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Feb 23, 2006 10:48:41 GMT -8
What makes you think the vessel will not be searched when departing Cairo?
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Feb 23, 2006 10:51:13 GMT -8
No FF searching and securing cargo from the port of embarkation is the smart thing to do. Can someone tell me why? Again, how does this stop a ship from going somewhere else and picking up weapons? FF you need to do some research on this, do you really think that large cargo ships can make an unscheduled stop at some port without notification? |
|
|
|
Post by jfree on Feb 23, 2006 13:11:24 GMT -8
In other countries, what is to stop them? I think FF is trying to get at if it is possible, does anyone know?
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 14:08:17 GMT -8
Can someone tell me why? Again, how does this stop a ship from going somewhere else and picking up weapons? FF you need to do some research on this, do you really think that large cargo ships can make an unscheduled stop at some port without notification? Why does it have to be a port? Why does it have to be without notification? It seems so easy to get illegal goods onto a boat that checking the boat when it leaves a port is really useless. What's to stop a boatr from sailing off the coast of some rogue nation and being met by terrorists who put weapons on it? Oops....too bad we neglected the security of our home ports because now terrorists got weapons onto a boat. It seems so easy I'm surprised no one has tried it before. This whole proposal is a waste. We aren't going to spend the resources necessary to check EVERY ship coming to America from EVERY port world-wide. This is just retarded. |
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Feb 23, 2006 14:35:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on Feb 23, 2006 14:36:23 GMT -8
Hey Falcon, when this deal goes through and it's time for us to hit Iran, we're going to have a big USAF presence in Dubai.
Whaddya bet Dubai or Abu Dhabi is YOUR VERY FIRST DUTY STATION!
lol
They'll probably put YOU in charge of security!
I'd have to laugh my ass off.
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 17:02:32 GMT -8
It's funny for several reasons: 1) I want Security Forces really, really badly. In fact, it's the only job that I'm writing down on my Dream Sheet. 2) If I get SF, I'll most likely be deployed to the Sand Box within the first year. I just may be in charge of security in Abu Dhabi  |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Feb 23, 2006 17:04:54 GMT -8
Cameron - the Counter Terrorist blog pretty much backed up everything that I have said here.
I wonder why you posted it? Are you agreeing with me or no?
|
|
