# How do you think AQ will hit the USA ? Methods. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 28, 2004, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602 "2004-06-28T20:16:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/41 "2004-06-30T01:05:15Z")
> [@Kel Varnsen - Latex Division](#): > > You have no evidence that al Qaeda has planned **anything** major in the US since 9-11. Of course I don’t have any evidence, but I believe the government when they say they have it. They’ve issued numerous warnings and have even made arrests. I’m not cynical enough to believe that those warnings are all the product of political manipulations. > [@](#): > > But the maybe the reason there hasn’t been any attacks is all thanks to Bush or possibly this rock. However, there is no evidence for either of these conclusions. Wow. On the one hand, we have an elected president who’s responsible for setting broad policies and choosing the people in charge of the government departments most responsible for domestic security (the Attorney General, etc.). These policies and appointees have overseen the arrest and prosecution of numerous people living on US soil who have gone to terrorist training camps and done other illegal and highly suspect things. On the other hand, we have a rock. And you truly think that there’s no more reason to give the rock credit for preventing more terrorist attacks then the president. Huh. ---
**Author:** ![Kel\_Varnsen\_Latex\_Division](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aeb1de/32.png) [@Kel\_Varnsen\_Latex\_Division](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kel_Varnsen_Latex_Division)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/42 "2004-06-30T01:11:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Of course I don’t have any evidence, but I believe the government when they say they have it. Did you also believe the government when they said they knew _ **exactly** _ were Iraq’s WMD were? Or when the government said you could protect yourself from a chemical attack with plastic wrap and duct tape? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/43 "2004-06-30T01:47:16Z")
> [@Kel Varnsen - Latex Division](#): > > Did you also believe the government when they said they knew _ **exactly** _ were Iraq’s WMD were? Yes, I did, and they were obviously wrong. But I think that’s the exception rather then the rule. > [@](#): > > Or when the government said you could protect yourself from a chemical attack with plastic wrap and duct tape? I believe plastic wrap and duct tape would provide some protection from a chemical attack. As good as a full-body suit and a respirator? No. But they’re a bit more affordable. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/44 "2004-06-30T02:01:50Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > No matter how misguided you think Bush is, he _has_ dramatically increased domestic surveillance. Do you really think that _none_ of Bush’s policies have had a positive impact in this one area? Nope. F-9/11 had some glaring examples of stupidity. Bush has done almost nothing to guard the sea lanes, or the borders with Canada or Mexico. He made token gestures with airport security that haven’t been demonstratably effective, and which any moron would have done (he proves this case quite nicely). ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/45 "2004-06-30T02:57:31Z")
> [@Iridium](#): > > (I’m new, please let me know if I’m breaking any rules) Not yet 😃 > [@](#): > > Since coordinated attacks appear to be their strong point and public transportation (i.e. subway) is very difficult to protect, a 10-city rush-hour bombing spree might work. Does the US have 10 cities with subways? Anyhow - hitting just New York and Chicago would do the job. _groan… I ride the train in Chicago…_ Add in DC, San Francisco, and… does LA have a subway? > [@](#): > > It would probably be a winter operation, since local police are invariably watching for people wearing parkas and other bulky clothing in public places. Who needs parkas? Everyone carries backpacks and bags on the commuter trains. Or leave stuff in tunnels. > [@](#): > > The downside of subway targets is that they lack the symbolic value of hitting economic and political centers. Um… about 400,000 people a day pour into the Chicago Loop, an economic center, and most do so by train and bus. Make people afraid to take the train and Chicago’s economy tanks. DC - a political center, yes? - has a subway. New York City - ditto, a LOT of folks depend on the trains. No, we don’t have many mass transit systems… but where subways/el’s exist they are a major tranport network. Knock it down you cause real pain. > [@](#): > > I’d agree that AQ is still jet-happy, but domestic flights might be a real problem now. Do chartered/private jets require the same security clearance? Charter and private planes have _different_ security – this has been covered in a couple different threads. You can’t use a two-seat Cessna to knock over a skyscraper like the World Trade Center - what threat it represents is a different kind of threat. They’re used in different ways, have different capabilities… one size fits all security isn’t a good fit, you need to fit the security to what the threat is, or could be. Some places are off limits to private airplanes. In some places those who are using private airplanes DO have to pass through the same security as used by the airlines. Different sized airports have different needs and requirements. Yes, there has been an improvement in aviation security across the board. Is it enough improvement? Probably not. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/46 "2004-06-30T04:02:59Z")
> [@vibrotronica](#): > > The sniper thing would be quick, easy, and wouldn’t need very much manpower. One sniper at a time would be enough. Say you have ten, two-man sniper teams spread all over the country. On D-Day -1, all of the sniper teams (none of whom know each other) recieve a message: “You are sniper team #(X). When you see on the news that sniper team (X-1) has been killed or captured, begin operations and do not stop. If capture is emminent, blow yourselves up, taking the police with you.” That should be good for several weeks of trouble, and damned near impossible to stop. In fact, I think the lack of such attacks in the United States means that they don’t have the manpower on the ground to pull it off! > > Then there’s the old “hijack a Liquid Natural Gas ship and detonate in a busy port” routine. Or the Texas City ship-full-of-ammonium-nitrate-goes-boom gag. That seems more up al Q’s alley. As I said in an earlier thread, sniper teams all over the country shooting ten people a day and moving on to a different location to do it all over again. Day after day. Shopping malls. Schools. Train stations. Mix and match. Do it in the six weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas – the most important retail/consumer spending period of the year – and in no short order the psychological fear and economic collapse will tumble the Bill of Rights like a House of Cards. The Domino Theory at its best. They don’t need the big bangs and spectacular incidents to do the job. Those merely feed upon the excess egos of Americans. Besides, we are looking for the big stuff under the small rocks. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. America has so many weak links there is no point to go after the big stuff. Think David and Goliath. No matter how big and muscled Goliath might be, if David is willing to die for his cause, Goliath will lose. Just enough Davids going after the balls of Goliath will topple the big guy. Works every time. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/47 "2004-06-30T19:55:53Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > No matter how misguided you think Bush is, he _has_ dramatically increased domestic surveillance. Do you really think that _none_ of Bush’s policies have had a positive impact in this one area? ``` Well with the amount of money he is spending I can say that the "positive" impact isn't comparable. Just putting police in higher alert is an improvement from before. ``` So did he increase “homeland” security ? Yes Did he increase expenditure ? Yes Did he spend it well… no way. Sea lanes and some borders are being neglected… police underfunded… there are many problems that even a part of the US$ 100 billion wasted in Iraq would have been a major boost to security. Finally I think most are thinking of how invading Iraq for example worsened overall security for americans worldwide. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2004, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/48 "2004-06-30T22:48:50Z")
The only thing that makes me wonder about attacking children is, contrary to popular belief, I think some of these Islamist terrorists do have _some_ standards defining what is and is not an appropriate target. For instance, Hamas actually came out publically against the hostage beheadings in Iraq. I’m guessing some things make even AQ squeamish. Specifically targeting children may cross a symbolic line even with them. Of course, they’ll blow things up with children in them, but that’s a very random kind of thing. It could be argued children are collateral damage, just as they are when we bomb Afghanistan or Iraq to take out insurgents. If AQ have no scruples though, I agree, targeting schools would be cheap, easy, and probably among the most bang-for-the-buck terrorist attacks I can think of. Another idea: Liquid natural gas tankers, when their cargo spills out and is set alight, could immolate everything in a quarter-mile radius. I remember, around 9/11, there being a big to-do about a LNG tanker trying to dock in Boston Harbor, and what that thing could level if somehow breached and ignited. Since that was plastered all over the media, I have no qualms about discussing such a scenerio further. Fill up a small but relatively fast aeroplane with explosives. Maybe a private jet. Fly it into a docked LNG tanker in a big city…actually, I think Boston is the only candidate that fits this bill, so poor us. Or maybe you just paddle a small boat filled with said explosives up at night, or construct a small submersible. Whatever, just get the explosives close enough to the tanker. Chances are you’ll kill a few thousand people at the least, destroy a good-sized portion of a harbor and anything nearby, make a hell of a big flaming statement, and scare the crap out of the nation. Billions in property damage. Ugly, ugly footage of those who died, and worse, those who didn’t but were too close. Hundreds, maybe thousands of people who wind up surviving third-degree burns over large percentages of their body. Thousands more with second-degree burns. And so on. Right here in the cradle of the Revolution. Getting my asbestos-lined tinfoil hat now… ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2004, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/49 "2004-07-01T10:30:11Z")
Hamas did speak out against the beheadings ? Wow… didn’t get that news. Well Tim McVeigh thought children were collateral damage, the US govt. too. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2004, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/50 "2004-09-07T05:47:30Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > The only thing that makes me wonder about attacking children is, contrary to popular belief, I think some of these Islamist terrorists do have _some_ standards defining what is and is not an appropriate target. For instance, Hamas actually came out publically against the hostage beheadings in Iraq. I’m guessing some things make even AQ squeamish. Specifically targeting children may cross a symbolic line even with them. Of course, they’ll blow things up with children in them, but that’s a very random kind of thing. It could be argued children are collateral damage, just as they are when we bomb Afghanistan or Iraq to take out insurgents. > > If AQ have no scruples though, I agree, targeting schools would be cheap, easy, and probably among the most bang-for-the-buck terrorist attacks I can think of. > -lined tinfoil hat now… alas, this has become horribly timely I think I said somewhere that such attacks were “trivial” I don’t know what I was thinking… ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2004, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/51 "2004-09-07T10:32:17Z")
Threads like this are just what the government likes. They _like_ a bit of panic and uncertainty, since they can show they are “in charge”, that they are spending money wisely, that they are _essential_ to your security. The fact is that if AQ really wanted to target American citizens on their home soil again, they could do so fairly easily: a forged/stolen passport, a plane to Mexico, a hop over the border, steal a van, buy fertiliser, diesel fuel, fireworks and a mosquito coil, pack in scrap metal, drive to a major sporting, musical or political gathering, light the coil and leave. Repeat as necessary. Car bombs are so incredibly simple that we must ask the question: _why no car bombs?_ The answer, I contend, is something which the government would prefer you not to believe: **That AQ no longer poses much of a threat any more**. Osama Bin Laden was, or is if he still lives, a Messianic psychopath who wanted one big show-stopper. He tried and failed with [1993’s WTC bombing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing). He tried again and failed with [1995’s Operation Bojinka](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bojinka). September 11th was AQ’s _magnum opus_. It was successful beyond their wildest dreams, took years to plan, and they know they will never be so unbelievably lucky again. A few Wahabbi-Wannabe’s might try a few bombs or snipes, and could do so pretty easily despite what the government say, but I believe that terrorism is actually now a pretty minor issue in America. If anything, the greater danger comes from paranoid loons in the mould of McVeigh who would seek to pin _their_ crimes on AQ. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2004, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/52 "2004-09-07T11:36:17Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > The thing about al Qaida which most shocks and impresses Americans is that they aren’t just willing but _eager_ to die. That is a misconception. They are not “eager” to die anymore then anyone else, but they are made “eager” to become a warrior for the cause of God, Islam and the Umma. This is not new in Islamic history at all and it is no surprize that such a concept can still appeal to Muslims worldwide. (Compare it with US nationalism. Because of this nationalism - often combined with idealism - US soldiers are called heros and find a broad public support while they themselves volunteer to defend what they perceive as worthwile even if that causes their death.) What is new in this suicide-fighter concept is that in order to fight against the perceived ennemies/threats of Islam and the Umma, they managed to create of a theological defense for the use of suicide as a method of war. This created theological defense is the whole trick to recrute Muslims into doing things that normally only open the door to damnation.(Explaining how they came to that is an other issue.) Suicide is not permitted and condemned by the sayings of the Prophet himself, who warned that if you kill yourself you shall be tormented in hell with the same tool you used for comitting suicide. > [@](#): > > What would be far more shocking to Americans, for more corrosive to our willingness to fight, would be pure martyrdom operations. Imagine if al Qaida operatives began going to public places and simply killing themselves, without even harming anyone else–say, blowing themselves up in parking lots. While it would have most certainly a shock effect, I don’t see how they ever could find a way to defend theologically such pure suicidal actions = Without any other reason then to kill yourself to cause a shock effect instead of destroying the enemy in defense of Islam and the Umma. Shock effects do not destroy the enemy, they cause the enemy to reflect on the conflict which then eventually could provoke a willingness for striving towards to peaceful solutions. Striving for peaceful solutions is command of Al Qur’an, but that is something these people have excluded on forehand as a possiblity to even ponder about. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![sinical\_brit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/48db29/32.png) [@sinical\_brit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinical_brit)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602/53 "2004-09-07T16:51:56Z")
"Car bombs are so incredibly simple that we must ask the question: why no car bombs? The answer, I contend, is something which the government would prefer you not to believe: That AQ no longer poses much of a threat any more" Absolutely bang on SentientM ( pun indended) . If there are Islamic fundamentalists everywhere ( dont they live next door to YOU ?) and they are hell bent on destroying America - you’d have thought that at least 1 of them would have got their ass out of bed and had the common decency to blow him/herself up by now. I think we were sold a lemon. sin [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-you-think-aq-will-hit-the-usa-methods/252602.md?page=2)