Terrorism and the election year

As we enter the holiday season, and more importantly the 2004 election year, the risk of a terrorist attack in the US may rise significantly. Experts say extremist groups are reserving their biggest and "most spectacular" attacks for the US homeland. It is reasonable to expect such an attack to coincide with the election cycle.

Should there be such a "spectacular" attack within the United States, what will be the lasting political effect?

 

Here's you a possible answer:

The 50% of eligible voters who don't vote will blame Bush; the 50% who actually vote will rally behind Bush.

Any leftovers will blame Canada .

 

It depends on whether the attack (hypothetically resulting in a very large # of casualties) appears to have been preventable. If its more 747s crashing into buildings, Bush is gone. If its lunatics firing howitzers over the Niagara River into downtown Buffalo -- Bush wouldn't necessarily take heat for it -- but of course we'll blame the Canadians - you too Peekay!!

Now here's another interesting question: What would be the effect if the attack was committed by Osama? What if committed by the Iraqis?

I would be out for George's head on a pike if it turned out to be Osama.

This is probably better discussed over beers.

Rodger

 

Slight Threadjack.

Roger, I don't see any way that the hijacking of 747's can be totally eliminated. The public would not put up with the hassle they would have to go through, just to minimize the risk.

What would you suggest to eliminate this threat?

 

Time's have changed
Our kids are kids are getting worse
They wont obey their parents
They just want to fart and curse!

Should we blame the government?
Or blame society?
Or should we blame the images on TV?
No!

Blame Canada! Blame Canada!!
With all their beady little eyes
And flappin heads so full of lies!

Blame Canada! Blame Canada!!
There not even a real country anyway!

Blame Canada! Blame Canada!!
With all their hockey hubbabaloo
And that bitch Anne Murray too!

Blame Canada! Blame Canada!!
We must blame them and cause a fuss...
Before someone thinks of blaming us!



-peekay

 

I would rally behind the president, whoever it is. I know Pres. Bush would definately kick some asses, so I would STFU (Brad) and let my President do his job.

By the way, Peekay, do Canadians get pissed when Americans call hockey 'Ice' hockey???

 

Nope. Do you get mad when Canadians call american beer 'dish water?'

 

I think it has been eliminated. From the terrorists point of view, highjacking an airliner is relatively impractical now compared to other alternatives.

 

Well, hockey players are our #1 export... so feel free to call the game whatever you'd like, we don't mind.

Interesting poll results so far. Presumably right after an attack, patriotism is at the highest (as it was immediately post-9/11), but such sentiment diminishes over time, partly replaced by partisan finger-pointing (as it is now.)

Is it fair to conclude then, should terrorists want to affect the outcome of the election (to oust Bush), they would have to execute an attack fairly soon? If they wait too long it will only help Bush (unless of course he is the victim of the attack.)

It's also not clear to me what might happen should terrorists manage to attack the US more than once next year. But the prospect that Al Qaeda will attempt to sway the election is quite disturbing, yet logically they'll try just that!

-peekay

 

Nah, dish water is more pleasant than what I call it; piss, swill, bile, dinner, breakfast, brunch, etc.

 

It's only been eliminated because no one is trying to hijack one now.

Why do you say it is impratical?

 

Darrin: I see your point, that even if 100% of our resources we aimed at stopping hijackings it could still happen and why blame Bush if it does. But Bush has diverted resources from the hunt for Osama and the anhilation of Al Qeada to Iraq. If Al Qeada nails us again I'd be ranting and raving that Bush commited treason -- at least until I realized that I sounded like Ann Coulter adn took a pill to calm down!!

Rodger

 

Good point, but let's hope that its all hypothetical and never becomes a reality.

 

I concur, amen to that.

-peekay

 

Al Qeada has moved all of its operations out of Afghanistan, in fact they were diversified by the time of the 911 attacks, they expected retaliation, just not to the degree it occurred.

As you have been quick to point out to others, your stance on Bush and the current structure of the war on terror is illogical. Consider that our attack on Iraq and the elimination of Saddam has put us on the ground with all the proper resources to fight the terrorist,

It has created a calling card to all terrorists in the world to flock to Iraq and many have… interesting strategy to focus our ability to fight them in a better arena… It also created the environment for more communication between the cells, again making it easier to expose and counter them…. I think much of the strategy and view of the war on terror hypothesized in the media and by many people takes a superficial approach to what we are doing, time will truly tell..

 

Just like us, Al Qaeda has demonstrated the ability to fight in multiple fronts. They have a distributed, cellular structure which makes this possible. While running in Afghanistan and resisting in Iraq, they've managed to execute attacks in Bali, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Marocco, among others. So it cannot be said that we're tying them to an exclusive Iraqi theater.

Why Al Qaeda has not successfully struck here again is an open question. Maybe the FBI/CIA/NSA have been very successful. Maybe they're just lying in wait for a "big bang" event. Who knows? But for sure they can fight in Iraq while still conduct operations here; of that I have no doubt.

-peekay

 

Its harder now to get a weapon onto an airplane, it's harder to take control and I think it would be much harder for terrorists to keep control long enough to fly into a target.

This isn't a very christmas-y thread.

 

let's face it. if someone were to jump up and proclaim a highjacking today, every 70 year old woman with a handbag would whip their ass. it was easy to do when people thought they were just on a detour. now that people know the plane is gonna crash into a building, they will not comply.

 

Ten terrorists on a mostly empty red-eye flight.

Piece of stainless steel, shaped like a compact disk, sharpened on one side; plastic handle to hold disk.

Think security should start looking at all CD's brought onto flights?

It is impossible to keep all weapons off of a plane.

I hope the terrorists don't read this and get ideas.

 

This situation could have existed in Iraq too. Unfortuneately, Bush has not seen fit to focus our military might against the terrorists or those who harbor them.

Rodger