Name for terrorist tactic

A common and unfortunately effective terrorist tactic is to make some kind of small strike, such as a small bomb set off in a public area, and then when the responders and others have crowded in, set off a bigger one and multiply the casualty count. I know the Israelis got hit with this kind of thing over and over before they worked out response methods.

Is there a name for this tactic? I seem to recall an Israeli term but can’t bring it to mind.

What is an effective way to blunt this kind of one-two attack?

This guardian article uses ‘daisy chain bomb’. As for counter tactics, the quoted expert basically suggests training to look out for the likely second strike.

Im not an expert, but I think in that case “daisy-chain” is more referring to the physical link between the first and the second - and could still be called “daisy-chain” if they were set off simultaneously.

I would think, but the article certainly doesn’t explore this, that you’d be better off with no physical link between the first and the second - and before that article I was always under the impression there was no link between a first and second bomb (showing I’m at least 4 years behind the times).

I think there was at least two cases in the US like this - at least one I think was an anti-abortion one.

Daisy chain usually means bombs that are connected and detonate at the same time. I have never heard it referred to anything else.

As far as the tactic in the OP, the only term I have ever heard is “secondary explosive” or “secondary attack”.

In Israel they shut down cell phone comm immediately, since things were being detonated that way by terrorists observing.

During 9/11, were cells shut down, or did cell comm jus collapse? Can’t remember.

You mean in NYC? It was not shut down. Service sucked because it was overloaded.

I have the term “bait bomb” in my head but I can’t seem to find anyone else using that term in that context.

“Double tap” has been used to refer to the practice when used by US drones

This is the correct answer, AFAIK.

“Double tap” has been used to refer to the practice when used by US drones"

Not only do I disagree that double tap has this meaning, call me an American, but I doubt that US forces in the form of drones have attacked emergency workers responding to primary explosions.

Could you identify an example of this happening?

I wish you were right, but sadly, you’ll find a pretty comprehensive and credible listing of multiple examples here.

That article also demonstrates the use of the “double tap” terminology (which was news to me), so you’re 0/2.

P.S. At the risk of preemptively junior-modding, I’ll point out that this is GQ and I’m just responding factually to your comments. People responding further on this slight tangent would be well advised to keep it factual and civil, or else start another thread in a different forum.

That seemed to be civil to me.
:slight_smile:

Thanks for the cites. I am dismayed to read the sources you provided and am left only to note that some of the info comes from the Bureau for Investigative Journalism an organization which has had some problems in factual reporting.

I believe Bear is a grunt. I’m ending my career as a combat engineer. That is the only term I’ve heard used too.

As has been suggested, this isn’t a tactic used only by terrorists.

Nor, I think, is it fundamentally a tactic devised or developed by terrorists. It’s pretty old.

Everyone is familiar with the concept of the feint attack. You mount a light attack at point A, intending to draw enemy forces away from point B, where your main attack will shortly come.

This tactic turns that around; you mount a light attack at point A, intending to draw the enemy into point A, where you think you will have some tactical or other advantage in engaging them with the second, larger attack that you have prepared.

For terrorists, of course, the “enemy” is not necessarily the opposing forces, but instead is noncombatants. But, basically, they’re following a pretty tried-and-true tactic for drawing their “enemy” into a vulnerable situation.

p.s.

a google of “double tap drone policy” produced "About 377,000 results (0.34 seconds) "

The policy was a subject lately in GD

“double tap” is indeed used in the doc:

In that guardian report. I don’t think the term makes sense in anything but the drone attacks.

I find it hard to believe the US would actually target emergency responders.

It’s been common since WWII for snipers to target medics when they respond to wounded soldiers. Rather a similar situation.

No. It isn’t.

A variant was used by the Luftwaffe during WWII. Some bombs would randomly fail to explode and the British had bomb disposal crews that disarmed these bombs so they could be disposed of safely. So the Germans began making bombs that were deliberately set not to detonate when they landed but were designed to explode when the bomb disposal crews tried to disarm them.