Predator wrote:I'm surprised Al Qaeda does not attack the Us more often, because the fact is, it would be so easy with just a few men, to cause havoc across America. Remember the snipers? There is no reason that model would not continue to work. How about in a dozen cities across America? What about bombing infrastructure - simple home made bombs placed at power exchanges and other easy, usually unguarded targets. How about shooting rampages in busy city streets and malls? Every now and then you get the odd nutter taking his gun to work and shooting a bunch of people - why not Al Qaeda?
Al Qaeda are either incredibly stupid and unimaginative, or they believe they've set the bar high with 9/11 and dont want to involve themselves in anything lesser. Which is foolish - they could utterly terrorize the entire US population so easily.
Yep.. Home Land Security.. just added you to the "LIST"
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
Yep.. Home Land Security.. just added you to the "LIST"
Ooh, does that put me in the draw for any special prizes?
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
Any terror tactic used long enough will eventually lose the majority of its impact. Let's face plenty of people get killed by average criminals every year and nobody bats an eye. Hell sometimes people can't even be assed to fund and support effective law enforcement (i.e. placing compotent officials in charge of the police instead of political cronies or populist hacks). I suspect that, if done on an extreme scale, these killings would be seen quite similar to drive-by shootings.
The immediate effects of a quick splurge in attacks would be a shortage of firearms for sale, increased applications for concealed weapons permits, vigilantis, and political pushes to close the border. Frankly it won't be long before all the operatives AQ can flood into the country end up dead or in custody. Eventually they will target the wrong individuals and get unlucky (even if the odds are in favor of the other guy dying, if you do it enough eventually you WILL lose). Basically an orgy of violence followed by a lull until the next batch of individuals decides to make a push until eventually it recedes from the front page.
I have to disagree. People in general do not fear drive by shotings because most drive by shootings are between one gang and another, not against average citizens, and not on a random basis. Yes, there is the occasional random drive by shooting, but even that is not perceived as a focused campaign against the average American.
People are already gripped by irrational fear of terrorism. Consider how many Americans have died in the US due to terrorism in the past few years. Compare that to the number who die due to motorverhicle accidents, or even the number of people who simply go missing every year. The number of people who've died in recent times from terrorism is miniscule compared to these. Your chances of dying at the hands of a terrorist are insignificant.
And yet people are afraid enough to buy guns, to buy silly parachutes if they work in tall buildings, and so on. And when the snipers were in action, people were afraid to leave their homes. If we saw what we did in Washington happen on a large scale even for a relatively short amount of time, that will cost America dearly in the economic realm, as an added benefit for the terrorists.
People are more afraid of terrorists and terrorist attacks than other threats even though other threats and every day dangers are far greater in magnitude. It is an irrational fear and I cannot imagine the American public ever becoming desensitized to it.
All of the various clampings down on civil liberties that others have mentioned in this threat would be a victory for the terrorists. Unlike you I have no faith in homeland security's ability to stop such attacks as I speculated about, but whether they did eventually stop them or not, there will be longterm damage to America's freedom, as there already has been with the Patriot act. It will be felt long after it recedes from the front page.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
The number of terrorist attacks on US soil that I can recall amount to a whopping 3. All of which were major bomb attacks, not simple shootings. Likewise there have been what, two "snipers"? It takes repitition to wear off the novelty and horror. After several thousand die it will no longer be front page news when somebody gets sniped.
People have an irrational fear because it isn't commonplace like drive by shootings. Hell look how little publicity the Ohio sniper generated compared to the first DC sniper. Do anything often enough and people adjust their views of it.
And I am NOT crediting homeland security with stopping AQ snipers, kidnappers, or the like. I'm figuring that eventually they will carjack somebody with a gun who tries to use it and gets lucky enough to kill their assailant even if they die themselves. The odds of that happening are low in any attack, but if enough attacks happen then eventually everbody gets unlucky.
I posted a thread about this earlier...I think it would be very devestating. Read Tom Clancy's new book...basically a few terrorists go into shopping malls around the US and shoot up innocents.
Proud owner of a B.S. in Economics from Purdue University Class of 2007 w00t
"Sometimes, I just feel bad for the poor souls on this board"
Nova Andromeda wrote:--If you are an American and thinking about posting to this thread I'd suggest thinking very carefully about what you say lest you end up on the wrong list....
Are you alluding to the Patriot Act and an American poster looking like they don't support the war on terror if they say the wrong thing here
tharkûn wrote:The number of terrorist attacks on US soil that I can recall amount to a whopping 3. All of which were major bomb attacks, not simple shootings. Likewise there have been what, two "snipers"? It takes repitition to wear off the novelty and horror. After several thousand die it will no longer be front page news when somebody gets sniped.
This is bullshit. If something is sufficiently horrific, the novelty does NOT wear off. Thousands and thousands of children are raped, yet the public does not become bored or disinterested with this crime; the anger and revulsion and calls for action do not fade.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
This is bullshit. If something is sufficiently horrific, the novelty does NOT wear off. Thousands and thousands of children are raped, yet the public does not become bored or disinterested with this crime; the anger and revulsion and calls for action do not fade.
Ever talk to a survivor from Nazi concentration camp or Stalin's terrors? It is bloody frightening that when presented with something often enough people do feel progressively less shock and horror. I've heard personal accounts of both happening.
Think about the Catholic priest scandal. It no longer illicits "shock" that scumbag priests exist and were protected; rather there is disgust but a feeling of same 'ol, same 'ol.
Anger builds, revulsion might be constant. Shock and horror fade.
As far as public interest, alright when was the last time the national evening news carried a child rape story as the lead? When was the last time such a story made the frontpage of the NYT?
In any event what is so inherently "sufficiently horrific" about people shooting other people? What facets of an AQ sniping random civillians would make it significantly similar to child rape?
AQ could set up 'sniper's alleys' along the freeways that lead to major US shipping ports. It could only be done once and involve a great many people and resources, effort, planning... but if bands of snipers could parlayze the freeways AND shipping at the same time, it would terrify people and dent the economy.
Of course, once the plan became evident (and it quickly would) the cops and National Guard would patrol the highways. It would probably go on for about 72 hours max, then the terrs would have to shift targets. Shoulkder-fired missiles near airports is one possibility, suicide boats in harbors (a la USS Cole) is another. Our transportation net is vulnerable.
One thing to consider is not bringing in AQ operators from the outside, but the radicalization of Muslims, especially non-Arab ethnicities, that already live in the US. Individuals that capture and behead would be rounded up by cops eventually, but what about larger scale cell action?
Picture a radical cell living in a city block area in, say, Chicago. Terrorists hide in there, sheltered by the locals, and when regular police go in to get the guys, they are attacked by local Muslims throwing bottles, rocks, maybe Molotovs. The riots cops go in with dogs and tear gas, water cannons, and the rioters step up as well, maybe with firearms...
At what point does it become evident that only National Guard troops or similar, with armored vehicles, will have to go in and pacify the place? It has happened before, in Watts, during the Rodney King riots... what would that do to the Muslims of America? Would they stand up and say, "this has gone too far, just say no to terror" or would they call for Jihad against their infidel Western Christian/Great Satan government?
And, BTW: Tharkun, people are still freaked about the Catholic sex abuse scandals and it still elicits revulsion. But the freak-out factor is over, now it is time to act. Court cases, settlements, and other legal actions are building-- this is hardly representative of a overall 'fobbing off' of the severity of it.
People don't run around screaming in shock all the time-- at some point we settle down and do something about the problem. But it is by no means swept under the carpet.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."
In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around! If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!! Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
People don't run around screaming in shock all the time-- at some point we settle down and do something about the problem. But it is by no means swept under the carpet.
I'm not saying it gets swept under the rug, or that people don't have strong desire to see justice done ... merely that the shock, horror, and novelty wear off with repitition.
Things get very messy, given the timing with the assault weapons ban /just/ expiring. Not only is there a surge in firearm purchases, but /heavy/ fireaerm purchases. National Guard enlistment skyrockets, as civilians wish to get equipment and training to defend their homes and families, as opposed to becoming involved in an overseas military action. Guard units are called back from overseas to do what they're designed to do, defense. It becomes a very bad time to be an ordinary, home-grown criminal, both because of massively stepped-up law enforcement, and because a far higher percentage of your marks are armed and very keyed-up.
Chronological Incontinence: Time warps around the poster. The thread topic winks out of existence and reappears in 1d10 posts.
Out of Context Theatre, this week starring Darth Nostril.
-'If you really want to fuck with these idiots tell them that there is a vaccine for chemtrails.'
