Why hasn't America been hit by terrorists yet?

Butterbean569 · Post by **Butterbean569** » 2004-09-20 10:52pm

I was pondering this question earlier today, and thought I'd get some input from you guys. While terrorists have made some attacks on other countries (Spain and Russia to name a couple), their obvious target (here in America) hasn't been struck since 9/11.

The question is, why?

It's been 3 years and they haven't followed up on their succesful attacks against the US. In a purely strategic sense of warfare, I just don't think this makes sense. There are plenty of nice targets in the US where simple attacks (carbombs, etc) could do substantial damage. One could easily drive a van packed with explosives onto Ross-Aide stadium (Purdue's football stadium) during a gameday and detonate it near a jam-packed grandstand. And that's just Purdue (which i doubt would be a target they'd be looking at....)

Are the terrorists just biding their time, slowly putting a plan in place that will strike an uber blow against the US? Or has the war on terror really been that effective...basically destroying the terrorists ability to make attacks on US soil?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-20 10:56pm

Probably because believe it or not, we have actually made a difference. Attacks like September 11th are difficult and expensive and it's harder for them (how much harder, we'll probably only find out the hard way).

And of course sadly, some of that's been because we're being attacked elsewhere in the worlds.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2004-09-21 12:18am

There is no doubt we've disrupted Osama's terrorist structure. Hightened security probably makes some difference.

On the other hand something like 9-11 is very difficult to pull off and costs a lot of money. 9-11 took years to plan, so if another attack of that scale is in the works, I would imagine it would not be hatched for another year or two.

What I don't understand it why they don't go for a smaller scale attack. Something like a pair of guys with guns shooting up cars stuck in traffic.

Maybe that is too simple and not grandiose but if it happened 2-3 times a year, it would stir up fears among Americans I would think.

Butterbean569 · Post by **Butterbean569** » 2004-09-21 12:22am

TrailerParkJawa wrote:What I don't understand it why they don't go for a smaller scale attack. Something like a pair of guys with guns shooting up cars stuck in traffic.

Maybe that is too simple and not grandiose but if it happened 2-3 times a year, it would stir up fears among Americans I would think.

I think THAT would scare Americans a lot more than an attack on the towers. Think about it...if the terrorists hit a couple small or mid-sized towns, then *everyone* would be a target. I don't feel threatened by terrorism at all out here in Indiana...NYC just seems too far away...but if there were attacks in places like Kansas or Ohio, it would become a lot more "real" and would scare me a lot more. I'm sure that would happen to the average american, too.

Tom Clancy's latest book was about this type of thing...terrorists crossed the Mexican border, bought a shitload of small-arms, and went to 4 shopping malls across the country and shot up innocents. Scary

Bugsby · Post by **Bugsby** » 2004-09-21 01:35am

It's also a fact that, no matter what you might hear on TV, we are not the terrorists only target. Sure, we're a pretty big one. But they got a beef with all of Europe as well as a large percentage of the native Muslim population (the moderates), along with Israelis.... just to name a few. Why keep on kicking America when there are so many other places to bomb?

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-21 02:17am

Number one, obsession with the grand gestures and the big targets over the small scale operations. They have consistantly gone for the big splash. One of the most common flaws I've seen in the mental war-gaming of terrorist operations from a western perspective has been the assumption that they operate on an insurgent model in the fashion of communist-trained guerillas. This is quite likely due to the fact that this is a religious-based movement, and the holy warrior paradigm has them aiming for the dramatic martyrdom over more effective strategies.

Number two, footprint. This is one area where they play very much into a strength of our law enforcement apparatus, especially with regards to funding. Due to decades of vying with first the Mafia and later on the drug cartels, federal law enforcement has developed numerous tools and legal powers concerning the tracking of money movement. Combine this with the sophistication of technological means by which they can be tracked and eavesdropped on- sophistication beyond anything they can be trained to deal with in their native environments- makes for a very perilous operating environment when stateside.

Finally, number three, personnel issues. This ties into their home environments, and the difficulty they have in maintaining a low profile here. This isn't the KGB we're talking about, with the funding and space to build academies teaching operators how to move invisibly within target societies, these are boondocks training camps that cover the basics of gunnery and explosives manufacture. For insertion, they're playing from behind because the majority of their personnel belong to distinctive ethnic groups, and come from totalitarian regimes which are utterly alien to our society. Hence, they tend to stick out like sore thumbs. For example this sort of thing would not go unreported these days.

Another related personnel note- it's a big act of trust to send somebody off to a foreign land with a load of cash. After living fat for a while in relative security, Jihad Joe might get a bit less inspired to go chasing his virgins. How often this happens we'll never know, but by all means, let's hope it happens often.

I expect that the US will get hit again sooner or later. We're in a prime target zone right now, with the election coming up, and if we don't get hit, it probably won't be for lack of effort on Al Quaeda's part.

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-21 02:20am

Baka.

Could a mod please clean up my link up above? Even though I put HTML on in my profile, it's still showing as off for some reason.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-09-21 02:54am

You realize you can edit the post and clean it yourself, right?

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2004-09-21 03:02am

You better ask why the UK hasnt been hit yet. Its like there is every 2 months some lack of security scandal and they are the US most trusted ally

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2004-09-21 04:59am

Sorry the summer just ended at the line had been waiting for me for over an hour when I arrived before work to set things up....

I thought you said why haven't we been attacked by TOURISTS.....

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-21 10:30am

First thing I tried, my good Rogue, but even as I type this the options indicator still cheerfully informs me that HTML is OFF. Upon rereading the FAQ I see nothing to provide guidance in the matter, so I have to fall back on the childish explanation and blame my stupid computer.

Drooling Iguana · Post by **Drooling Iguana** » 2004-09-21 12:58pm

Why send people halfway around the world to kill Americans when Bush is serving them up on a silver platter to their doorstep?

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2004-09-21 02:16pm

Drooling Iguana wrote:Why send people halfway around the world to kill Americans when Bush is serving them up on a silver platter to their doorstep?

Exactly. In fact, you could probably play this up as a positive consequence of the Iraq- Iraq is acting like a "lightning rod" for the transnational terrorists that would otherwise be causing trouble all over the Arab World, and joining Al-Qaeda.

Otherwise, remember that we have been approaching the national security issue MUCH more forcefully- none of this "sitting around while the warnings came in" that prevented adequate warning of the Bush Administration by the CIA before 9/11.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-21 03:44pm

What the hell is this doing in OT?

Butterbean569 · Post by **Butterbean569** » 2004-09-22 11:37pm

I didn't consider it *real* news, since it most mostly hypothetical banter. Guess I was wrong...

I was thinking about putting it in N&P to start with, but thought that THAT mod would yell at me for putting it in the wrong forum

Post by **Coyote** » 2004-09-23 06:26am

One theory I've heard is that the terrorists make a lot of money off of us. Lots of Islamic charities exist in the US and the level of income that Muslims make in the US is astronomical in comparison to the scut wages of the typical worker in a tyrant Arab regime. And lots of non-Muslim sympathisers donate too (not people who sympathize with terrorist aims-- people who legitimately want to give to 'poor, oppressed' people around the world).

Also, movement and freedom: Muslims in the US are protected by our laws of non-discrimination and they can move about fairly openly. We are also a society that is very open with its information-- the average dude can get books, magazines, or web access to all sorts of information about US operations, weapons, etc.

And finally, a large segment of the non-Muslim population that would defend any Muslim that has been discriminated against. Even fudgebags like Osama bin-Laden would have supporters here, screaming for his civil rights and making excuses for his behavior as a 'victim of US imperialism and oppression'.

So in other words, Muslims in America have money, information, free movement and are shielded from discrimination to a degree that does not correlate to their conditions in the Arab world. America is both the Great Satan and the goose that lays the golden egg. They'll keep America somewhat safe (the occassional big strike notwithstanding) and knock out our pillars of support (Arab puppet regimes, Europe, allies, etc-- the Lesser Satans).

Meanwhile, the Muslim population in America will continue to grow, and city councilmen, mayors, then governors will start getting elected. America will become the new al-Andalus, the jewel in the crown of the new Caliphate-- maybe in a few decades, the way they see it.

Meanwhile, the poor but desperate can simply cross the border to Iraq and get burned up for Jihad, while bleeding away America in a quasi-Vietnam (they know our political society cannot bear that sort of strain).

In other words, they leave America alone largely because time is on their side, from their pov, and it is too difficult for too little gain, and in fact some resources (see above) would be lost.

Spoonist · Post by **Spoonist** » 2004-09-23 06:44am

Nah, the simple reply is that you are giving them too much credit.
It's not like we are facing a smart enemy here. The targets of 9/11 where chosen not for their strategic value but for the symbolic value. All the loosely associated so called terrorists have little in common and even less planning. It is quite clear that it took them 3 years to plan 9/11 and it was a one time fluke.
Most would be terrorists would rather do something close to home than to travel across the world and learn a new language. It is much easier to travel within their own culture and hit targets within that realm. So if a Lebanese want to become a suicide bomber they hit Isreali targets because that is closest to home.

If the terrorists would have been a thinking planning organization then you would have seen follow up attacks, you would have seen strategic targets and you would have seen suicide bombings in USA/Europe instead of Israel/Iraq. Since we didn't they aren't a thinking planning organization.

Use Occam's razor. It doesn't have to be more complicated than the simplest explanation.

The_Nice_Guy · Post by **The_Nice_Guy** » 2004-09-24 01:43am

Well, the muslims ARE increasing their population pretty quickly in Europe, so Coyote's point isn't that far off the mark. It's not even a conspiracy; it's just the way their society is structured towards population growth and human investment.

Problem is whether all those new muslims will assimilate into modern culture and society. If they do, good for everybody. If they don't... Say hello to Eurabia.

As to whether the same is taking place in the US... that's for the better informed to report.

TWG

Post by **Broomstick** » 2004-09-24 06:34am

Petrosjko wrote:Hence, they tend to stick out like sore thumbs. For example this sort of thing would not go unreported these days.

Indeed - there's a national hotline for pilots and airport personnel to report suspicious activity directly to the TSA. It's been averaging seven calls a day. Yes, some arrests have been made - oddly enough, mostly TV reporters trying to prove general aviation security is poor to non-existant and winding up taken away in handcuffs. At least three separate intances this month (I guess they were hoping for a good story for sweeps week or something) and the reporters involved have discovered that the Feds are about as amused by their antics as they are about people making bomb jokes in airport passenger terminals.

Yes, I think increased awareness and security have made a difference - not all the difference, but some of it. Won't entirely prevent an attack but it will make it more difficult to execute.

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-26 02:35am

Spoonist wrote: Use Occam's razor. It doesn't have to be more complicated than the simplest explanation.

Very true on all counts. By appearances, a lot of Al Quaeda was a 'hate America' club that was long on talk and short on execution. Again, they weren't professionally schooled in these matters.

Broomstick wrote: Yes, I think increased awareness and security have made a difference - not all the difference, but some of it. Won't entirely prevent an attack but it will make it more difficult to execute.

Again, agreed. It's a war, and they will be taking their best shots, and that means that along the line, people will get hurt and killed, possibly by operations carried out here in the states, but for the most part we seem to have kept the lid on.

Hadn't heard much about the reporters getting busted for screwing with airline security, but then you're lamentably closer to the aviation industry than I am these days.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2004-09-26 07:15am

From the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association website:

Proof AOPA Airport Watch concept works
Here's the proof that GA airports really are small communities and that the "residents" know when something is amiss. Yesterday, alert folks at a general aviation airport contacted authorities who nabbed two suspicious characters before they could cause trouble.

"This incident demonstrates the validity of the Airport Watch concept," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Vigilant pilots and airport workers make the best security force because they know who does and doesn't belong at the airport. They can easily spot the things that just don't seem right."

But there's more to this story, including a twist worthy of Paul Harvey.

The story begins as a man telephones an FBO at St. Louis Downtown Airport (CPS), not far from the Gateway Arch, and asks about chartering a helicopter. About an hour later, two men of Middle Eastern appearance walk into the FBO, pull out cash to pay for the flight, and present driver's licenses from two different states as ID. Office staff notices their car is registered in a third state.

"Things just didn't smell right," said St. Louis Downtown Airport Director Bob McDaniel, "so the mechanic took them into the hangar to see the aircraft, while the office person called the FBI and local police." (Airport Watch guidance says to call local police or the FBI if you suspect an immediate threat to life or property.)

The helicopter was blocked by other aircraft, and the mechanic used that as an excuse to stall the two suspects, who began unloading backpacks and odd-shaped luggage from their car.

Local police arrived shortly and hauled the suspects off to jail in handcuffs. Police discovered box cutters and other potential weapons hidden in the bags.

And now (with apologies to Paul Harvey), the rest of the story.

After a little time behind bars, the two "terrorists" confessed that they were NBC employees from New York. Their assignment: A story on how "easy" it was to get information and directions to a helicopter and then hijack it. St. Louis was their first attempt; the network reportedly planned similar tries to penetrate security at airports around the country.

"Kudos to the folks in St. Louis for using the Airport Watch concept to thwart this 'terrorist' attempt," said Boyer. "Praise, too, to the local police for responding quickly and appropriately.

"And to NBC: We appreciate that you accurately reported these misguided escapades on tonight's network news. And we hope this gives you — and the other media who make a living by generating unnecessary fear — ample reason to stop making GA a security scapegoat."

August 12, 2004

It was also reported at www.avweb.com, but I can't seem to get to their archives this morning. There were a couple hundred postings of just this incident alone on aviation-related websites.

This is actually one of the few instances where reporters were caught doing this sort of thing and it was actually reported in the news media - the usual reaction is for the TV station (for some reason, it seems to usually be TV) to bury the story. They tried it locally in my area about two years ago and the TV didn't say jack about it - though the local papers did.

One mistake a LOT of people make is assuming that because they can't see security it's not there. You don't need a 15 foot high barbed-wire topped chainlink fence to be secure. Because the county sheriff's aviation wing is based at my airport there is a 24/7 police presence. If I show up for a pre-dawn flight and don't stop by the sheriff's first or say hello to the person in the squad car in the parking lot the noise of opening a hangar or taking the chains off an airplane prompts a visit from Officer Friendly. Most of the airplanes are kept in locked hangars. Those that aren't are secured by various means to make them much more difficult to steal. During the day, staff (and even us non-staff pilots) will check out any new face in the parking lot, much less anywhere else. At another small airport, across the state line in Illinois, they HAVE installed the sort of fencing I mentioned - around the hangars and tie-down areas, which are much more extensive at their location than mine. Which secures the hardware, which is the stuff with potential danger. Yet people still call to fence in the entire airport - it's just not necessary folks. Anyone tries to get vicious with me while I'm in a running airplane will have to face the spinning meat slicer attached to the front of it.

In fact, drug runners are finding it near impossible to steal airplanes anymore - in my area, we've been having a problem with them renting the airplanes with which to conduct their smuggleing operations. I mean, if they make their trip, clean the airplane out real good, then return it the way they received it they can get away with it, but a few multi-engine pilots in my area rented a twin ("We're planning a trip to Texas with a few friends...") and were caught near the Mexican border with the airplane's interior packed solid with "illicit substances". They had, in fact, removed the seats, upholstery, and paneling to provide more storage space. Said items were found at self-storage unit in good condition, along with all the necessary tools to remove and replace them when done (obviously, if you return the airplane stripped they won't rent to you again). How nice, even the criminals are being forced to be more honest - can't steal planes so they have to rent them. Crazy world, isn't it?

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-09-26 01:37pm

They're gonna try and hijack a helocopter? Talk about making you task more difficult than it has to be.

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-26 05:53pm

Sweet. It also serves as proof of the simple fact that the best security is to have as many eyeballs on the ground as possible. Security is a matter that can't be passed off as 'the other guy's job'.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2004-09-26 07:41pm

Or to automated systems... which I see all too frequently. The problem is, machines are predictable, and no machine is immune to failure. People can fail, too, but we're much less predictable. We change our habits without warning.

And yeah, planning to hijack a chopper is kinds of stupid, but these were reporters, ya know? I think that now the message is starting to sink in that the 2 and 4 seat "spam cans" aren't much of a threat folks are starting to get wiggy about helicopters. Or something.

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2004-09-27 02:24am

Broomstick wrote:Or to automated systems... which I see all too frequently. The problem is, machines are predictable, and no machine is immune to failure. People can fail, too, but we're much less predictable. We change our habits without warning.

Reminds me of a comment by a friend of mine, a former sonar tech in the navy.

"The majority of subs are found when some bosun's mate is out getting a breeze, looks over and says 'Hey, is that a periscope?'"

It's a matter of fundamental practices, which technology can assist but never replace.

And as a matter of civic duty, we are responsible for keeping our eyes open for aberrations like those.

(Albeit without going all Mrs. Grundy or getting hysterical.)