Over the Christmas period we have seen about 15 flights from the UK and France to the US be cancelled because of fears of some kind of terrorist activity.
I don’t for a minute want to imply that the security services are pulling our chains here but 15 or more flights pulled in a little over a week would suggest that the the terrorists are winning this war hands down!
I’m inclined to believe that we are being just a bit too fearful. We are in danger of having our lives, our normal, everyday routines curtailed by the mere threat of terrorism. If we carry on down this road then OBL and the rest can retire happy in the knowledge that their work is done. They can sit back and watch us implode under this - largely - unfounded fear that each of us is going to end up as a statistic in the war on terror, where in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.
More of us will die in traffic accidents this week than OBL and his minions have ever killed. We are cut down in our prime everyday by the very lifestyles we love to live. We get killed by cars, food, drink, smoking, gas, electricity, lack of exercise etc, etc.
We need to put the fear of terrorism into perspective and refuse to let it devalue our way of life. Every business trip we delay, every foreign holiday we cancel is succour to the terrorists. We don’t boycott McDonald’s when the fat guy at work has a stroke, we don’t give up our cars when the guy down the road dies in a pile up. So let’s show a little old fashioned “stoicism” in the face of adversity and carry on with our lives as normal.
‘We’ - meaning British – do show more stoicism, as generally speaking to the UK security services, but there are reasons for that. Namely 30 years experience of terrorism. Like anything, you get to become more sanguine the more you’re exposed to particular kinds of risks.
The US security services would never admit it, but they were clueless after 9/11 and still haven’t exactly got up to speed on the nuances of counter-terrorism as it relates to the general population. They’re making mistakes,most of them relating to how to best cover their own, and Bush’s, re-election arse.
There is also the possibility that the Bush administration is less concerned about screwing up the business of Air France and BA than it is the all ready screwed businesses of US airlines.
I’m sure you don’t think the people of London were “stoic” on the first few days of the Blitz, it takes time and experience.
Fwiw, ditto Baghdad vs. Basra, the Americans just aren’t used to peacekeeping or nation building work - essentially different professions from what they usually do.
Stoicism would mean less votes for Bush ? Weapons of Mass Distraction don’t work if people are stoic.
Eventually I think the word “weary” and “uncaring” will be more common when related to “terrorism”. Then the issue won’t be milked as much… unless OBL pulls another spetacular attack of course.
The three airports in the Washington area seem to handle about 120,000 people per day. Let us say over 7 days 840,000 people pass into/out of the Washington area.
Say each flight canceled was a 747 size plane of 450 people. So 6,750 people were inconvenienced. Even if only 10% of the total number of people entering the Washington area are from international flights (84,000) a mere 8% of international travelers were inconvenienced. It could be lower, but at least this gives us a ballpark figure.
Now if we look at the total number of international flights we get 349 a week. 15 canceled/delayed flights amounts to about 4% of the typical flight load. Besides wasn’t a single flight canceled multiple times? That would change the numbers even more so.
The Christmas season likely sees an increase in international and domestic flights making the percentage of flights cancelled and people delayed drop to even smaller numbers. It hardly seems a massive overreaction.
The issue seems to be that while passengers may be willing to risk their personal safety to travel, attacks using commercial airplanes potentially put a greater number of people at risk. I.e. 400 people on a 747 could kill an equal or larger number of non travelers. Given the recriminations within the American intelligence agencies since 9/11over reactions is going to be standard operating procedure for a while.
You know that several of the flight numbers, esp. BA 323, were mentioned directly by the terrorists in the ‘chatter’? And also the routes? They’re not picking flights out of a hat.
That said, I agree that nowadays the terrorists wouldn’t really have to DO anything to achieve their goals, but in the end I think they’d prefer the economic disruption AND the high body count.
First of all the terminology “WAR on terror” creates already a distorted perspective.
Next: non-US nations have an other perception of terrorism then the US, because they experienced terroristic and similar behaviour throughout their long history and the history of the regions.
Which explains for a part the worldwide disagreement with this “war” (including the laughable arrogance of the “you are with us or against us”) being forced on other nations by the USA.
And then we don’t even talk about the USA using this fake argument to invade sovereign nations and occupy them.
Or the use of this fake argument to lock people up in cages like animals during years, without even providing a single shred of beginning of a proof that they have anything to do with this fake “war” on terror at all.