re: #517 lawhawk

Somalia and Chechnya were failed states even before the jihadis came to view them as safe havens. The jihadis flock to them because they are failed states, but they also go to Pakistan because of the border regions - and even with the Islamists having full support and have made multiple attempts to overthrow the government there, they’ve fallen short.

It’s not so much the failed state aspect, it’s just that they were workable states until the Jihadis got there. Both had half decent infrastructures left behind and both went to hell when there were a preponderance of Jihadis.

So, you now think that the threat is overrated? That’s fine - but as someone who regularly utilizes the mass transit repeatedly targeted by terrorists - who works next to Ground Zero (itself targeted twice), takes the tunnels (targeted multiple times), etc. the threat is far more substantial than if you’re from somewhere in suburban America. The odds of being a victim from a terror attack increase the more frequently you’re using the very systems/institutions that have been repeatedly targeted.

I know the threat and actual damage caused is overrated. It’s not a case of me being glib, either. The effectiveness and the scope of the attacks peaked in 2001. That was their zenith.

We’ve also boosted our security and surveillance following 9/11 to make it more difficult for terrorists to hijack airlines (armored cockpits to thwart hijackings, etc).

I guess that’s why they decided to switch tactics and start blowing up all the bridges and tunnels across the USA with their huge army of sleeper Jihadis.

The key is to remain vigilant and if you let down your guard, the terrorists can and will take advantage.

You sound like I used to.

Actually - they went from hijacking planes with nothing more than boxcutters to making all kinds of bombs that evaded detection by airport screeners. So, now a hijacking is much more difficult to attempt because of the armored cockpits, but screeners still can’t pick up the liquid explosives that hijackers now use in their recent attempts.

See, this is what everyone seems to forget about the essence of the tactics used by Jihadis: they hit you where you aren’t. It is, by and large, an insurgency, right? We can agree that they aren’t a high tech, regular army but more of a sneaky bunch with limited numbers.

It follows that if they wanted to make an impact on something symbolic, and not well protected. So, they would have taken out numerous bridges and tunnels. They would be driving explosive laden trucks into shopping malls. They would be doing all manner of mayhem. They aren’t because they can’t. It’s not that they don’t want to. Hell, I want to live in a giant mansion with walls made of plasma TV’s. I can’t.

Lack of ambition isn’t the problem, it is ability. From inception to execution, 9-11 took almost a decade from planning to Ground Zero. With disruption of training networks and funding, how long do you think it will take to mount something on a similar scale? Longer than a decade, because they were unmolested prior to this.

The paranoia has to stop.