Terrorists: The Next Generation

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

I truly hope what I'm about to discuss isn't something that might generate some sort of problem. In the sense that the government or terrorists might read it and as a result we draw some undesired attention. I am only discussing this as an exercise in creative thinking and a way to discover, potentially, a defense against some kind of attack that could cost many lives.

It is generally considered an inevitability that another attack based on U.S. soil, or elsewhere within the free world, will be made by elements we call terrorists that will approach or surpass the scope of the 9/11 attacks.

What I propose is that we examine potential targets, potential dates, potential methods, and potential outcomes of any attack we can imagine.

The first thing I would consider is what would be a target that would attract a terror attack. I believe, based on prior attacks, that symbolism plays a part in the choices of targets made by terrorists.

The WTC and Pentagon represented symbols of America's wealth and power, and I would have been likely to look at places that represent those elements as the most likely targets, if we had not invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.

Given that there have been changes in the dynamics of the situation since 9/11, it is quite possible and I am going to say probable that a new attack is more likely to seek to create as much loss of life as it can. I have this gut feeling that the lack of any major terrorist event recently (in the West) is a result of terrorists working up a truly spectacular initiative that is taking time to evolve. Surly one might consider thinking that way to be paranoid, but no one expected 9/11 either.

Given that simple loss of life on a massive scale is the goal of an attack, it makes it plausible that some weapon of mass destruction, either chemical, biological, nuclear, or other would be involved.

This doesn't give me any greater idea as to what might be the most likely target, or targets, though.

Anyway, I am hoping some of you will add your thoughts and maybe we can come up with something that will be of some relevance and value. I don't want to rule out anything, the purpose of this discussion is to take a look at things from differing points of view, and maybe there will be something that stands out or bears closer examination.

[MPG]

I have this gut feeling that the lack of any major terrorist event recently (in the West) is a result of terrorists working up a truly spectacular initiative that is taking time to evolve.
The Madrid train bombings occured on March 11, 2004. The London bombings happened on July 7, 2005. I don't think you can really say that there was a lack of terrorist activity recently. One or two years, respecticely, is quite recent.Given that simple loss of life on a massive scale is the goal of an attack, it makes it plausible that some weapon of mass destruction, either chemical, biological, nuclear, or other would be involved.Still, neither of these weapons are as readily available to terrorists as your government may want you to believe. If they were, the attacks in London would not have been carried out by suicide bombers using relatively cheap bombs based on home-made explosives.

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

Well, I am starting with the belief that the terrorist methodology is evolving. This evolution is made manifest by an exercise in patience. The reward for this patience will be a plan that will allow for as much loss of life as can be inflicted.

I am trying to determine what, realistically and within reason, a target or targets might be. Once we consider all of the facts, and extrapolations from those facts, I think a reasonable guess might be made. Of course, it might be that a target would be selected according to what weapon or weapons are available for deployment.

[Space Tycoon]

We have plenty of experience to draw from with other countries-- Russia, Britain, India, Colombia, Spain. I think transportation infrastructure (ie planes, trains, buses, ships etc.) are the most likely targets as are corporate buildings, shopping malls, restaurants, nightclubs, government buildings, schools... this doesn't exactly narrow things down much. You can lock the country down tighter than a drum and still, a determined cell will get something through eventually.

Eventually we are going to have to face the truth that we really have no clue how or when we will be hit next. I hope people will wake up to the fact that a major part of reducing terror is addressing the root causes and issues that produce the anger. We have no excuse, by now, to claim ignorance of these issues. It's been five years, almost.

Also, al Qaeda has already accomplished one of their major goals with 9/11: bogging down the US and Britain in two losing wars of attrition. America's inability to successfully win an urban guerilla campaign without going into financial hock has been exposed for all the world to see. The Administration is in array. Generals are openly speaking against Rumsfeld's running of the war, as well as Cheney's plans for Iran. Bush's numbers are at an all-time low. One wonders if another 9/11 is necessary at this point.

Still, I wouldn't rule it out. bin Laden did offer that truce late last year--which surely can only mean more attacks are on the way.




.

[kah]

I have to say that I fear the poisoning of major water sources. And I think about the possibilty of a terrorist attack anytime I see a large group on tv. Soccer games, NASCAR races, Superbowl, the inauguration speech, the Oscars, etc. If it was all about symbolism, I wouldn't be surprised by attacks on Wall Street or Hollywood. Honestly, if you look around, do you think people in the US would be more horrified by an attack on our politicians, or on our movie stars? Pretty sad, isn't it?

[omicron]

personally, if they could take out a couple of those freaks in Hollywierd(ala Baldwin brothers in South Park: The Movie), I think I'd probably thank the terrorists. :D

Omi

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

I think Las Vegas is definitely a potential target. Why? Didn't the 9/11 hijackers spend some time there? And I can't think of a more "decadent" place in the eyes of Islamic fundies. Poisoning a water or food supply would seem to be an attractive choice, but the problem with that is many toxins simply won't survive if they spend too much time exposed to the elements. There are also checks and processes that food and water go through before reaching our tables. This would make delivering such an attack problematic.

I think gas (like sarin) is potentially the most likely choice of weapons at this point. The NY subway system is also highly at risk, in my opinion. Sarin, released at Grand Central Station for example, could kill quite a few people.

However, my greatest fear is that the fundies will acquire a nuclear device of some kind, and set it off in a place like London.

[sickness]

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, at least a few of the hijackers did their homework by casing cross-country flights and followed those with connections to Las Vegas. I could never see the logic in terms of an attack on NYC and DC so I can only guess that they were doing recon for future al-Qaida missions.

[Space Tycoon]

However, my greatest fear is that the fundies will acquire a nuclear device of some kind, and set it off in a place like London.

That remains a fear of mine as well.

One scenario I can envision, which would also be quite impactful, would be the uncovering of such an attack before it in fact took place. This would not only look good on the DHS, but would give the government all the rationale they needed to exhort the American public into supporting strikes against the usual suspects in the Mideast.




.

[kah]

I am not really afraid of a nuclear attack. It may be because I don't live near a major city, or because I don't believe the terrorists will go to such lengths. They are perfectly capable of mass carnage without nuclear weapons. Look at the damage they do every day in Iraq. Over 30,000 dead civilians (http://iraqbodycount.net/press/pr13.php) alone. Can you imagine the death toll at a soccer game using only dynamite under the stands? Look how many people die in riots and stampedes already ~~> Stadium Disasters (http://www.crowddynamics.com/Disasters/Stadium%20Disasters.htm) Or at the Great White Concert (http://www.turnto10.com/news/1997690/detail.html) in Rhode Island. Imagine if the terrorists didn't like Rod Stewart on this (http://www.guinessrecords.com/content_pages/record.asp?recordid=53418) day.

I don't think terrorists have to be technologically advanced to accomplish their goals. That's what makes them scary.

[Intelligent_Design]

I'm telling ya Terrorist will attack our Coffee supply. That would cause much suffering.

[Asonokirk V 2.0]

I think I've come to the conclusion that trying to determine when, how and what terrorists might attack is an exercise in futility. There are just too many variables to work up anything remotely resembling an accurate prediction.

As I see it, there is never going to be any adequate defense against terrorism, and that terrorism in one form or another has always been, and will always be with us. The only thing we can do is just keep our eyes open and if something happens, deal with it at the time.

What we SHOULD NOT DO (but we have), is allow a terrorist act to make us give up freedoms and become a paranoid state. I am sickened by our response to terrorism.

[kah]

I think I've come to the conclusion that trying to determine when, how and what terrorists might attack is an exercise in futility. There are just too many variables to work up anything remotely resembling an accurate prediction.

As I see it, there is never going to be any adequate defense against terrorism, and that terrorism in one form or another has always been, and will always be with us. The only thing we can do is just keep our eyes open and if something happens, deal with it at the time.

What we SHOULD NOT DO (but we have), is allow a terrorist act to make us give up freedoms and become a paranoid state. I am sickened by our response to terrorism.

Exactly. If we just sit around and worry about what is going to happen, we are going to rearrange our lives to avoid the possibility of an attack. That is what they want. They want us to be afraid, and to give up our freedoms in every attempt to prevent an attack that can't be prevented. They were probably thrilled when they found out the US government had started unauthorized wire-tapping. Just one instance of lost freedom due to terrorism. I just live day by day, trying to work towards a better future, because that is all I can do. We are all going to die anyways, in some way, at some time. I don't want to live in fear, so I don't. That's why I don't quit smoking. Well, that, and the fact that I like it. I could worry about dying of lung cancer, but then again, I could get hit by a bus tomorrow, and never even get the chance. If I lived in fear of the future, I would not work towards a career, or have kids, or pay my bills.

[Intelligent_Design]

Exactly. If we just sit around and worry about what is going to happen, we are going to rearrange our lives to avoid the possibility of an attack. That is what they want. They want us to be afraid, and to give up our freedoms in every attempt to prevent an attack that can't be prevented. They were probably thrilled when they found out the US government had started unauthorized wire-tapping. Just one instance of lost freedom due to terrorism. I just live day by day, trying to work towards a better future, because that is all I can do. We are all going to die anyways, in some way, at some time. I don't want to live in fear, so I don't. That's why I don't quit smoking. Well, that, and the fact that I like it. I could worry about dying of lung cancer, but then again, I could get hit by a bus tomorrow, and never even get the chance. If I lived in fear of the future, I would not work towards a career, or have kids, or pay my bills.


The chances of me Winning the lottery and getting struck by lightening on the same day are still not as great as me dying in a terrorist attack.

[tstone]

But chances are overwhelming that none of the above will happen to you, nor should you shape your life around their possibility, beyond taking commonsense precautions.