With Bush’s ratings slowly slipping Bin Laden needs to get an attack on the USA going before the election. How do you think they will manage to do so ? What methods ? Civilian airliners again ? Ship ? Truck ?
I’d warrant that ship borne will be the chosen means of delivery… and that it will be regular explosives mixed with either flammable stuff or cheaper explosives. I expect they will go for big casualty figures and not to demolishing landscapes and monuments.
Shhh! Don’t give them ideas!!
Do we really want a group of the smartest people in America debating where Al Qaeda should attack next? Regardless, I feel that you are likely correct in the sense of waterborne, as the airways are too securely defended now. However, the logistics of it is a little difficult, so I tend to think they would try and attack a cruise ship or something of the like, which, while being foreign boats, typically have mostly American passengers. This ranks highly on the bad-o-meter for me.
This is one of those cases where I would prefer not to speculate, for fear of providing a fresh idea to those that might do such a thing.
I recently had lunch with an old friend who has been working with FEMA and his state emergency managment department on possible terrorism and other disaster scenarios. I won’t go into detail, but, Man!, did he have some nasty thoughts!
Does anybody seriously think that Al Qaeda trawl message boards looking for ideas? :rolleyes:
IMO, the US is safe for a while. 9/11 happened because, at that time, the US was a soft target (remember the boxcutters?). Now, America is a much tougher target to hit. Far better go for the easier ones, in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Spain, Turkey,… Bin Laden, and his supporters, have little care who wins the election. Their hatred will remain undimmed.
Well, Michael Moore did reveal in Fahrenheit 9/11 that there’s 100 miles of Oregon coastline patrolled by one part-time state trooper…
Variations of this thread have been debated before. FWIW, I believe there are simple, low-tech methods AQ could use that would achieve its goals.
Is discussing potential methods a bad idea? Perhaps that is worthy of a debate. For me, I see nothing wrong with it. The government already has the best Hollywood types developing disaster scenarios for them. How is that different from ordinary folks doing the same thing? From friends and relatives in the airline industry, it is still very simple to implement terrorist attacks via commercial aircraft. It is not too difficult to apply the same principles to less secure areas such as trains, buses, shopping malls, tourist attractions, etc.
Besides, discussion of possible methods is one thing; putting them into action is quite another. What may be a more critical discussion is what ordinary folks are doing in being more vigilant in their everyday lives.
I have contended before, and continue to do so, that if bin Laden’s organization could have mounted an attack on US soil before now they most certainly would have done so. I don’t personally believe that the risk of an attack is that much higher right now than it has been since 2001, and I course I hope I’m not just talking out my bottom here.
Re: the propriety of discussion of this nature, I seriously doubt that anyone is going to come up with something that hasn’t already been considered by potential terrorists; not because board members are necessarily unimaginative, but because the terrorists themselves obviously spend a lot of time thinking about these things. Also, as others have said, the idea of terrorists monitoring this message boards for ideas on where and how to strike next seems frankly ludicrous.
Since, even after 9/11, major terrorists events remain fairly rare in the US, just about anything would serve to seriously spook the American public. Despite all the talk of possible radiological, biological or chemical attacks, however, to date bin Laden’s organization has not yet demonstrated that they can actually mount such an attack anywhere. OTOH, materials for crude bombs are relatively easy to acquire and big bangs in places where do not normally occur always attract plenty of attention, so this seems the most likely scenario for anything that might happen in the near future. So far the most popular method of attack, if simple destruction and mayhem is the aim, seems to be a series of coordinated bombings of public ground transport, as seen in Paris in the mid-90’s, Spain this year, and Israel/Palestine for a number of years. Second would be destruction by bombing of symbolic targets; either government or business-related.
There are plenty of other possibilities, but I’ll leave others some room to chime in.
5 gunmen go into 5 schools and kill as many children as possible. Next day 5 more gunmen enter 5 different schools and kill as many children as possible. The next day every school in the country is closed. Parents will not send children to school. Parents have to stay home. Economic chaos for weeks.
When the schools re-open start with the suicide bombings in schools. If the schools are too secure bomb parks, bus-stops, or any place with children.
Ever try landing a boat on the Oregon coastline?
uh-uh
trivial and lacking symbolic value.
I’m lookin for a well placed slug of c-f. about one third up the washington monum,ent.,
upon detonation, instant broke down dick for dub.
Smartest people in the world, ya damn yankee.
You think killing hundreds of American children is trivial and laking symbolic value? This action would show everyone in America that our children are not safe. An action like this is almost completely indefensible. With just 30 guys and 30 guns and some bombs a reign of terror could be unleased on American for weeks that would bring this country to a hault.
Republican Convention, NYC.
Would simultaneously administer a slap to the face of “can’t get fooled again” NYC and the Republican Party while making martyrs of Republicans (some name-brand types would no doubt be in attendance), and as long as they don’t accidentally get Georgie himself, his party, being specifically wronged and attacked, gets the reactive anger-vote.
America goes wild-eyes bugshit to see that our most concentrated security efforts can be breached with massive American casualties and that our very political system looks so vulnerable and begs for Patriot Act III.
Probably wouldn’t be all that hard. You’ve got a few zillion out-of-towners and all their support staff descending on NYC from all over, and all of them authorized to go into the Javits Center. You probably only need to win one heart & mind.
More effective yet would be those 30 guys with 30 guns each shooting up one school (or any public place, really) a day for 30 days. If they did it all in one day, sure there would be impact, but it it starts to diminish right away. Look at 9/11, and people now arguing that AQ isn’t really that big of a threat to us, et cetera.
String them out, all over the country. Each attack doesn’t have to amount to much, but as quintessential ‘middle-aged white male in a white box van’ John Allen Mohammad has shown, they don’t have to. They just need to keep occurring and occurring and occurring. After just a short while, then a true sense of helplessness would set in for many.
And such a plan requires jack shit for specialized training or equipement; Just some coordination and 30 willing Jihadists.
I don’t think that there will be routine bombings and attacks like in Iraq currently or in Israel. I think that if Al Qaeda ever does get going, they will with assassination attempts and strategic bombings. Maybe they won’t go for the top, but trying to kill people active in the War on Terror- Rumsfeld, Powell would be a poignant message to the country. Also bombings at monuments (Lincoln Memorial seems to be an easy target), or at/near political institutions (anywhere in D.C.).
I don’t know if Al Qaeda is cabable of another massive attack in the U.S.
You just use 5 for the first two attacks. After, that it is all singles. Sorry if I wasn’t clear. You also probably don’t want to do it everday. More of an impact if there is some surprise.
I completely agree with this. I think the psychological value of random violence at schools, restaurants, malls and public venues would really hit the US hard. But after a few tries at this though, I think the terrorists would find us seriously taking off the gloves both at home and abroad. Which would mean bad things for America and the world. Which is why I am glad it hasn’t happened. When I worked at a very busy restaurant, I had contingency plans made out in my head about what to do in case of a bomb blast. Since I worked in the kitchen, well separated from the crowded part, I figured I was partially safe.
Sorry Lambchops, patriotism was running high. I didn’t know the rest of the world would jump into the fray on this kind of thread, seeing as how we are trying to figure out how they would attack the US. But yes, I edit my statement to include the smartest people in the world as well.