In the U.S.A. or Europe there is no realistic way to estimate the type, magnitude, or probability of the risk, nor any way to narrow down the potentially affected regions.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think that we have to be constantly asking ourselves, 'How do we calculate the risk?' And sometimes we don't calculate it correctly; we either overstate it or understate it.
War zones are dangerous, protests can be violent, also, natural disasters are difficult to cover, so there are going to be risks.
We live in a world where there are many risks, and it's high time we start taking seriously which ones we should be worried about.
Risk more than others think safe.
In my judgment, the greatest risks are international terrorist groups like al Qaeda and Hezbollah. The war in Iraq has taken our attention off those priorities.
Often you need to take some risk, but it must be a realistic risk, you can't take a crazy risk.
Every day as Chancellor I see alerts telling me of risks around the world.
What are the odds that a nuclear emergency like the one at Fukushima Dai-ichi could happen in the central or eastern United States? They'd have to be astronomical, right?
The influx of families and unaccompanied children at the border poses many risks, including grave public health threats.
We've had risk assessments performed by Harvard University, which said that even if we did have a small number of cases in this country that the likelihood of it spreading or getting into any kind of human health problem is very, very small.