NORWAY?

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-05-22 05:47pm

Al Jahzeera(sp) has been running a tape from an Al Queda commander who orders terror cells to hit the usual suspects, Isreal, US, etc. But also mentions Norway, without a specified reason.

According to the spokesman from Sweden's neighbor to the north, who spoke with Bob Edwards, there are three, possibilities for why:
1. Oslo Peace Accords gone sour.
2. Norwegian soldiers and bombs hitting Afgani targets during 2002
3. They've mixed Norway up with Denmark(Though this depends entirely upon whether or not the terrorist was in the US Public School system[j/k])

What say you O wise members of the SD.net forums?

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-05-22 07:14pm

Just because they could. Norway is a target that makes everyone feel uneasy.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-05-22 07:39pm

Maybe some Norwegian dude pissed them off so they might get their revenge on the whole country.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2003-05-22 07:43pm

The E.U would panic more with a major attack in Oslo than, say, in London or Paris, where we are expecting one to happen. If it happens in Oslo, it can happen in Lisbon or anywhere else.

Lord Sander · Post by **Lord Sander** » 2003-05-22 07:50pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:The E.U would panic more with a major attack in Oslo than, say, in London or Paris, where we are expecting one to happen. If it happens in Oslo, it can happen in Lisbon or anywhere else.

Hmm, Scandinavia often seems the safest region on the planet. I have no idea why, it just seems to radiate "safety".
Maybe (or probably) it's just me.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-22 07:54pm

Norway is a western nation, and one few would expect an attack against.

Oddity · Post by **Oddity** » 2003-05-23 03:56am

*snort*

The Al Queda commander probably just fucked up. Yes, Norway is an oil nation, but we're not that important.

Personally I'm not going to believe it until a bomb actually goes off.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2003-05-23 04:32am

Lord Sander wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:The E.U would panic more with a major attack in Oslo than, say, in London or Paris, where we are expecting one to happen. If it happens in Oslo, it can happen in Lisbon or anywhere else.
Hmm, Scandinavia often seems the safest region on the planet. I have no idea why, it just seems to radiate "safety".
Maybe (or probably) it's just me.

[Robin Williams (paraphrased)]It's the whitest region on Earth! An Arab there would stand out like an albino at the Apollo - You'd notice.[/Robin Williams]

Taken from his 'Live on Broadway' DVD.

(He was talking about how everyone was praising the security at the Olympics in Utah, replace 'region on Earth' with 'state in the Union')

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-05-23 09:26am

The Al-Qaeda guys probably just heard some Burzum CDs and weren't satisfied....

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-05-23 10:22am

Norway, huh? Well, i guess even Al Qaeda makes mistakes. Who knows maybe they had an extra lunatic and nowhere to send him.
"Quickly Achmed, get me an atlas, we must find another nation of imperialists! Lets see...Luxembourg....no, funny name..... Litchenstien....no, too small....France, no, i don't feel like having to run the place after they surrender....how about...Norway!"
"Brilliant Idea Imam! we shall send our minions immediately! Allah be Praised!"

Oberleutnant · Post by **Oberleutnant** » 2003-05-23 11:14am

If the threat is genuine, what I doubt after seeing how al-Quaeda's attacks have been limited to muslim nations after Sep 11th, then it would probably be because of the Norwegian involvement (F-16 bombing runs, special forces operations) in the Afgan war against Taliban and terrorists.

If remember today's newspaper article correctly, it is considered highly unlikely that the al-Quaeda commander who made the announcement would have mistakenly said Norway instead of Denmark, since he is said to have worked in a Copenhagen-based muslim newspaper. Also, if the threat was targetted against Coalition members which participated the Iraqi war, then why didn't he also mention Poland?

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-05-23 02:20pm

Oberleutnant wrote:If the threat is genuine, what I doubt after seeing how al-Quaeda's attacks have been limited to muslim nations after Sep 11th, then it would probably be because of the Norwegian involvement (F-16 bombing runs, special forces operations) in the Afgan war against Taliban and terrorists.

If remember today's newspaper article correctly, it is considered highly unlikely that the al-Quaeda commander who made the announcement would have mistakenly said Norway instead of Denmark, since he is said to have worked in a Copenhagen-based muslim newspaper. Also, if the threat was targetted against Coalition members which participated the Iraqi war, then why didn't he also mention Poland?

I can't see what Al Qaeda would stand to gain by attacking Norway or any European power. My gut feeling is that this is just another psycological jab, meant to spread tension and unease. An attack on an EU nation, especially one the scale of September 11th, would strengthen the resolve of NATO worn down by disagreements over Iraq, and create another angry mob of 300 million people waiting to rip Osama bin Laden a new asshole.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2003-05-23 05:22pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Oberleutnant wrote:If the threat is genuine, what I doubt after seeing how al-Quaeda's attacks have been limited to muslim nations after Sep 11th, then it would probably be because of the Norwegian involvement (F-16 bombing runs, special forces operations) in the Afgan war against Taliban and terrorists.

If remember today's newspaper article correctly, it is considered highly unlikely that the al-Quaeda commander who made the announcement would have mistakenly said Norway instead of Denmark, since he is said to have worked in a Copenhagen-based muslim newspaper. Also, if the threat was targetted against Coalition members which participated the Iraqi war, then why didn't he also mention Poland?
I can't see what Al Qaeda would stand to gain by attacking Norway or any European power. My gut feeling is that this is just another psycological jab, meant to spread tension and unease. An attack on an EU nation, especially one the scale of September 11th, would strengthen the resolve of NATO worn down by disagreements over Iraq, and create another angry mob of 300 million people waiting to rip Osama bin Laden a new asshole.

Nitpick: Norway ain't an EU member.

McNum · Post by **McNum** » 2003-05-23 05:51pm

Well, here in Denmark we're paranoid as usual. Since we actually had forces in Iraq (it was a small battleship and a sub) our media is all over the "Al Qaeda can't see the difference between Scandinvian contries" angle.

What they'd want to attack here is beyond me...
(I know where I would strike to hurt Denmark, but that would not be within Denmark. There is a much better target if the wind comes from the east...)

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-05-24 12:46am

It could be a mistranslation as opposed to a mistake by the person in question. Arabic isn't related to the Indo-Aryan family of languages by a longshot, and translation is impercise. Considering the names of some countries like Britain in Arabic come out roughly as "Land of the Anglos" or the like, it's possible Denmark is "Land of the Norsemen" or somesuch - And then what would Norway be? "Land of the Norser Norsemen?" (Only half-kidding; literally translated that's not impossible. Of course, literally translated the name of Kim Jong-il also means "Golden Correct Sun"). Even with professionals on the job it's not impossible that a mistake like that could have been made, but the fact that Poland wasn't included does seem to make it lean towards something else.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-05-24 01:12am

It's because Norway and Al Qaeda are enemies locked in a deadly game of intrigue and falafil.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-05-24 01:25am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:It could be a mistranslation as opposed to a mistake by the person in question. Arabic isn't related to the Indo-Aryan family of languages by a longshot, and translation is impercise.

Indo-Aryan?!?!

I thought the accepted term was Indo-European?

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-05-24 03:09pm

McNum wrote:
What they'd want to attack here is beyond me...
(I know where I would strike to hurt Denmark, but that would not be within Denmark. There is a much better target if the wind comes from the east...)

Russia?

Tom_Aurum · Post by **Tom_Aurum** » 2003-05-24 05:54pm

I'm wondering if Norway, why not holland while they're at it. Anyways, reason? Because I guess Norway is a center of Sensible western culture that hasn't gone nuts and submitted to fear.

McNum · Post by **McNum** » 2003-05-24 08:38pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:Russia?

No, not Russia. Barsebäck... Imagine what would happen if they caused a leak there with wind from the east. That would be very bad for Copenhagen.

(To those who don't know what Barsebäck is, it is a nuclear power plant in Sweden. It is located very close to Copenhagen, and Denmark has repeatedly asked Sweden to shut it down.)

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-24 08:57pm

Causing a leak in a well-designed nuclear reactor with containment vessel would be a fucking pain to say the least. You couldn't do it with a reasonably sized external explosion, you'd need to fight your way into the building and then set off some pretty damn heavy charges. A nightmare scenario is a 50-100 terrorists attacking a plant like that, but in reality it’s a minor risk. A dozen car and truck bombs against public buildings is far easier to pull off and far more likely to happen.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-05-26 11:41am

McNum wrote:
Simon H.Johansen wrote:Russia?
No, not Russia. Barsebäck... Imagine what would happen if they caused a leak there with wind from the east. That would be very bad for Copenhagen.

(To those who don't know what Barsebäck is, it is a nuclear power plant in Sweden. It is located very close to Copenhagen, and Denmark has repeatedly asked Sweden to shut it down.)

Wait isn't Sweden the country where they had a nuclear plant powered by coal?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-26 02:57pm

SyntaxVorlon wrote:
Wait isn't Sweden the country where they had a nuclear plant powered by coal?

How the fuck is that suppose to work? Sweden has countered Danish complaints about Barsebäck with its own about pollution from Danish coal power stations drifting over Sweden, but I don't know how you could jump from that to a nuclear power plant running off coal.

Oberleutnant · Post by **Oberleutnant** » 2003-05-27 02:41am

indeed. You can say a lot of things about Swedes, but they are certainly not idiots who would try to develop a nuclear power plant that works using coal as the source of energy. Every Swedish nuclear power plant designed by the ABB Atom (or whatever the Swedish atomic energy corporation is called) works the same way as they do elsewhere in the world.

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2003-05-27 07:14am

SyntaxVorlon wrote:Wait isn't Sweden the country where they had a nuclear plant powered by coal?

*Shakes my head*

ABB Atom Builders of the worlds fines nuclear plants.

Hopefully that statement was just a brinfart or something SyntaxVorlon

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

NORWAY?

Well?

NORWAY?

Re: NORWAY?