Ted Koppel: “We’re entering one of the most dangerous periods..."

[GatorAbe7]

Came across this Ted Koppel quote from his latest Sunday show:

"We’re entering one of the most dangerous periods this country has ever known.”

“A. It’s not over in Afghanistan. B. To the degree that al Qaeda has moved over into Pakistan, that’s a country that has over 100 nuclear weapons. Syria, which is an ongoing problem. The suggestion constantly seems to be that we need to come in on the side of the rebels. There are at least 1000 Al Qaeda members in Syria today fighting on the side of the rebels. If the chemical weapons fall into their hands, big problem.

Iran . . . remember now . . . it might even have been on this program that Bibi Netanyahu suggested that come spring, come early summer if the Iranians still have not pulled back from building a nuclear weapons the Israelis may attack – the Iranians would respond against the United States and they have the capacity to do it with cyber war.”

On one hand, I think the established world is entering a new wave of danger given the immense unrest from the borders of Morocco to Pakistan and incidents such as Benghazi might only be the beginning. On the other hand, Koppal lived through the tail end of WWII, Vietnam, and the Cold War and especially during the cold war America was likely in much more danger from Russia than from any of these Arab Spring-style uprisings.

Possibly Koppel makes this remark due to the passing of National-entity vs National-entity wars to more of a sub-national paramilitary forces that transcend the local governments. Forces such as Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc.

[Minister_of_Information]

A truly troubling set of circumstances.

[ChartsandGrafs]

That's some good, grade-A fear mongering propaganda from Koppel. You've got to love the way he slyly put 'Al-Qaeda' and 'nuclear weapons' together in the same sentence. Anything to justify more wars and interventions.

[Minister_of_Information]

Lord knows there is nothing to fear by Al Quaeda acquiring nuclear weapons. Perish the thought!

[g8orbill]

entering? we have been in it since Jan 20. 2009

[ChartsandGrafs]

LOL, Al-Ciada "acquiring" nuclear weapons. What, you figure the pro-U.S. government of Pakistan is just going to hand them over and risk being annihilated? Yes, I'm sure they'd love nothing more than to be vaporized under a bunch of nuclear fireballs just so they can strike at the U.S. by terrorist proxy.

Come on, man, don't be ridiculous.

[Minister_of_Information]

LOL, Al-Ciada "acquiring" nuclear weapons. What, you figure the pro-U.S. government of Pakistan is just going to hand them over and risk being annihilated? Yes, I'm sure they'd love nothing more than to be vaporized under a bunch of nuclear fireballs just so they can strike at the U.S. by terrorist proxy.

Come on, man, don't be ridiculous.

You first.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Tell me, who's going to be stupid enough to give Al-Qaeda nuclear weapons? Who would have anything to gain from that and what could they possibly gain? The origin of a detonated nuclear weapon can be traced. If someone gives Al-Qaeda a nuke to detonate on U.S. soil, we'll almost certainly know where it came from. Every government on the planet knows this, which is why nuclear terrorism by proxy is so unlikely.

If you're going to attack the U.S. with nuclear weapons, you might as well go all out with a full attack, because the response is going to be overwhelming anyway.

[Minister_of_Information]

Who said they would be "given"?

[ChartsandGrafs]

If nuclear weapons aren't going to be readily given, sold, or traded to Al-Qaeda by a nuclear-armed government, how do you propose Al-Qaeda would acquire them? Through theft? Or is Al-Qaeda just going to develop their own nuclear weapons program in the remote mountain caves of Afghanistan? That sounds like something right out of the plot of a James Bond movie.

Seeing as how the United States government has aligned itself with Al-Qaeda "rebels" in Libya and Syria, what makes you think Al-Qaeda would have any interest in using nuclear weapons against the United States anyway, assuming they could acquire them?

[Minister_of_Information]

I think the most likely method for AQ to acquire nuclear weapons would be via the chaos of a failed state, presumably in Pakistan.

[vertigo0923]

entering? we have been in it since Jan 20. 2009

i think you mean 2001.

[wargunfan]

A dirty bomb is all they need. If AQ manages to explode one in downtown Manhattan the economic fallout alone would be devastating.

[Spurffelbow833]

Since I have no control over what Al-Qaeda and the several governments do, I long ago quit worrying about any of it. Thank God for the internet. At least during the "duck and cover" days we had better television and a genuinely worthwhile thrill occasionally, like conquering Mt. Everest and landing on the Moon.

[Dreamliner]

Since I have no control over what Al-Qaeda and the several governments do, I long ago quit worrying about any of it. Thank God for the internet. At least during the "duck and cover" days we had better television and a genuinely worthwhile thrill occasionally, like conquering Mt. Everest and landing on the Moon.

I miss those old duck and cover drills. Those were the days. Both of my grandfathers had fallout shelters and I still remember their musty smells.

[Spurffelbow833]

I miss those old duck and cover drills. Those were the days. Both of my grandfathers had fallout shelters and I still remember their musty smells.

I'm sure they were selling features for a home back then, like a workshop or a pool.

[ChartsandGrafs]

A dirty bomb is all they need. If AQ manages to explode one in downtown Manhattan the economic fallout alone would be devastating.

Maybe the FBI can help them do it, as they did with the first World Trade Center bombing.