Time for some answers.

"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
m...
* US * wrote in message
. ..


I can't disagree with any of your points, especially the fact that
Saddam was disarmed. Yet the 9/11 attacks was carried out with nothing
more expensive or explosive then box cutters and airline tickets.


And training courses in how to fly an aircraft, that part
was not cheap.

Keith

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:34:09 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

"DJYahtzee" wrote in message m...
[...]
I can't disagree with any of your points, especially the fact that
Saddam was disarmed. Yet the 9/11 attacks was carried out with nothing
more expensive or explosive then box cutters and airline tickets.

And training courses in how to fly an aircraft, that part
was not cheap.

Keith

Good point.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
m...
* US * wrote in message
. ..


I can't disagree with any of your points, especially the fact that
Saddam was disarmed. Yet the 9/11 attacks was carried out with nothing
more expensive or explosive then box cutters and airline tickets.


And training courses in how to fly an aircraft, that part
was not cheap.

Keith

Anyone with a couple of thousand dollars can learn to fly, guy.
Compared to any other means to kill 3000 people, it's chicked feed.
Just the guns and ammo for an conventional assault to kill that many
can cost ten times that much.

"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
m...
* US * wrote in message
. ..


I can't disagree with any of your points, especially the fact that
Saddam was disarmed. Yet the 9/11 attacks was carried out with nothing
more expensive or explosive then box cutters and airline tickets.


And training courses in how to fly an aircraft, that part
was not cheap.

Keith

Anyone with a couple of thousand dollars can learn to fly, guy.
Compared to any other means to kill 3000 people, it's chicked feed.
Just the guns and ammo for an conventional assault to kill that many
can cost ten times that much.

Sim time for a 757 isn't cheap. Combine that with a few years living
expenses for 20-30 people...

Not *really* expensive, but far more than a couple of boxcutters and airline
tickets.

Pete

"Pete" wrote in message . ..
"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"DJYahtzee" wrote in message
m...
* US * wrote in message
. ..
Anyone with a couple of thousand dollars can learn to fly, guy.
Compared to any other means to kill 3000 people, it's chicked feed.
Just the guns and ammo for an conventional assault to kill that many
can cost ten times that much.

Sim time for a 757 isn't cheap. Combine that with a few years living
expenses for 20-30 people...

Not *really* expensive, but far more than a couple of boxcutters and airline
tickets.

Pete

Point taken, though it doesn't rule out using military and commercial
pilots who are already trained.

Your good point doesn't affect my original thought, though.

I don't really believe Saddam was heavily involved in 9/11 (though the
satellite pics of a possible 727-hulk training site 80 miles south of
Baghdad were very suggestive), but even after his forced disarmament,
he still had enough resources and influence to carry off an attack
along the lines of 9/11. Because of his disgrace by us during Desert
Storm, he had the hatred and the will to harm us. Those reasons are
why I considered him a threat.

Before 9/11, I believed the same way you do. 9/11 showed me how easy
and cheap it is to attack innocent Americans. I believe that, even if
he had had no active plans at the time (a point I'm not willing to
concede, after his alleged attempt to kill GHWBush), 9/11 showed the
world we were vulnerable and Saddam would have tried something
eventually.