Terrorists on the Move

[coinich]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/...ex.html?hpt=T1

Another attempted terrorist attack on the United States in coming months is "certain," the heads of major U.S intelligence agencies told a Senate committee Tuesday.

Despite the strong cyber-terror undercurrent in there, the article (and others scattered across news sites) are saying either more minor attacks or a major attack are imminent.

If we have this kind of intelligence, why are we releasing it? I can't see us saying "Haha, we see you Al Qaeda" in any attempt to scare them off, and at best it would simply alert them that we are keeping a closer eye on things. I'm also not going to believe the Kath-type idea that its to perpetuate the idea of terrorism to scare the general populace. Frankly, I'm more interested on why this story was published. Can anyone explain it a bit better?

[Being]

It is, in part, to fortify the justification for accelerated arms deals with Arab countries.

U.S. speeds arms sales to Persian Gulf allies

The thrust of the article is the containment of Iran. But the U.S. government is not as adept as some in manipulating the free press to intelligently inform the masses. They let this bit slip through the cracks,

The new force is expected to grow to 30,000 personnel and will be used to deter attacks by al-Qaeda

[Supermarioman]

It's probably going to be 9/11 mark 2, only with a suitcase nuke instead of hijacking planes.

Assuming they aren't stopped of course.

[Wraith]

Uh...no.

[GGT]

Toby, do these people vote?

[Loki]

It's probably going to be 9/11 mark 2, only with a suitcase nuke instead of hijacking planes.

Assuming they aren't stopped of course.

You're wrong would be the best way to response to that. We get these warnings so that the relevant agency can say "we told you so" if they're unable to do their job and allow a terrorist through. If there is a terrorist attack, it will likely be pretty low scale, and involve a low degree of technology (guns or improvised explosives).

[Supermarioman]

You're wrong would be the best way to response to that. We get these warnings so that the relevant agency can say "we told you so" if they're unable to do their job and allow a terrorist through. If there is a terrorist attack, it will likely be pretty low scale, and involve a low degree of technology (guns or improvised explosives).

Why would Al Qaeda wait almost a decade since their last major attack on the U.S to only blow up a car bomb?
Maybe it won't be a nuke, but it must be large scale, otherwise they're just wasting time.

[GGT]

Depends on how you look at The War on Terror. Have they already won by instilling such fear into us, or by exploiting our already present tendency to value fear?

We had a long running popular show called The Fear Factor, they ate worms and eyes to get money.
People pay to be scared by riding roller coasters and dropping from planes in a parachute.
I know folks who buy the triple washed bagged lettuce, and proceed to wash it again, afraid of germy dirties.

Forget dirty bombs, now they put explosives in their underpants. We take our shoes off at the airport because of the shoe bomber.

It's almost like a parody of a SNL parody, without the humor.

[Loki]

Why would Al Qaeda wait almost a decade since their last major attack on the U.S to only blow up a car bomb?
Maybe it won't be a nuke, but it must be large scale, otherwise they're just wasting time.

Just because they might want something doesn't mean that they have anywhere near the capabilities to actually succeed at it.

Depends on how you look at The War on Terror. Have they already won by instilling such fear into us, or by exploiting our already present tendency to value fear?

Do you really think al-Qaeda cares about the level of freedom in the US?

[GGT]

No, I think they've capitalized on our fears (including the growing distrust of the government to protect us) and they're using it to their full ability.

[Loki]

But that still implies that al-Qaeda actually cares about the relationship between the American people and the American government. The only aspect of that relationship it really cares about is getting the people angry at the costs they have to pay (mostly in terms of lives) as a result of America's foreign policy.

[GGT]

But that still implies that al-Qaeda actually cares about the relationship between the American people and the American government. The only aspect of that relationship it really cares about is getting the people angry at the costs they have to pay (mostly in terms of lives) as a result of America's foreign policy.

It's not the only aspect, but they do realize how Americans are tightly connected to our pocket books in all things ethical, we just call it free market capitalism. Taxes and death, our sureties in life?

Where was Bin Laden was educated again?

[Loki]

You assume that the goal of al-Qaeda is to make Americans feel bad about themselves. Unfortunately, it has more concrete objectives. It wants to kill Americans, and make each American believe that they could be next, which al-Qaeda believes would lead to Americans demanding that their government withdraws from the Middle East.

[GGT]

and make each American believe that they could be next

The Fear Factor, American style.

Americans demanding that their government withdraws from the Middle East.

The Fear Factor, Israeli style.

[Being]

But the question was, " I'm more interested on why this story was published. Can anyone explain it a bit better?"

[GGT]

But the question was, " I'm more interested on why this story was published. Can anyone explain it a bit better?"

Again, all I can say is it's exploiting our Fear Factor. It works very well on so many levels. It's now so pervasive and insidious, our journalism is affected. These official press releases aren't willy nilly, one would hope they are carefully orchestrated and planned out well. Our leaders and experts are now complicit in the whole damn thing, trying to "engage or alert" the populace.

Advance damage control, or whatever. Pick the Fear, it's always the most important Factor.

[Being]

Uh...no.

Really? You don't think the U.S. government needs to build popular support for further arming the Arab nations?

[Loki]

Really? You don't think the U.S. government needs to build popular support for further arming the Arab nations?

Because there was a major popular backlash against it, right?

[coinich]

Its all interesting discussion.

If it was meant to sway Middle Eastern allies, how would saying "We're gonna be attacked" convince them anything other than that our mission there is failing? Is there an Islamic translation of this on Saudi Arabian news stie(s)?

[Hazir]

My take on 'why tell?' would be that by claiming to have relevant intelligence, you force your opponent to be more careful in all his operations, thus making an actual attack just that much more difficult to plan. You could make him think again about plans that were about to be executed.

[Flixy]

Why would Al Qaeda wait almost a decade since their last major attack on the U.S to only blow up a car bomb?
Maybe it won't be a nuke, but it must be large scale, otherwise they're just wasting time.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have seriously damaged the ability they have to plan a well coordinated attack, and the war on terror does put constant pressure on them. Recent attacks haven't been as professional, and they mostly seem to focus on attacks in their own regions.

[']['ear]

Me, I think a campaign of exploding cars would be quite effective even if nobody dies. Americans have shown that they are quite readily stampeded by fear.

[LittleFuzzy]

As I recall, the British, Irish, Israelis, and Spanish all reacted quite readily to car-bombing campaigns as well.