View Full Version : Not if But When
Llike most of you, today if a very difficult day to get through without many tears being shed. To me, it still feels as if the attack happened yesterday and not 8 years ago.
I was pondering this question earlier, and it has caused me to be fearful for many reasons. I just wanted to see what your thoughts were on the subject.
Given what I believe to be the decayed state of our security since the Obama adminstration took office in Jan, I believe another attack on our soil is not a question of if, but when.
When it transpires, what do you believe will be the immediate outcome for our nation? Will it rally around it's President, or will it bring the President down? If a rallying effect occurs, will it lead us farther down a more liberal path, or will it make an extremely liberal President more conservative?
My fear is people like the President's Chief of Staff that says things like "never let a good crisis go to waste"
The Reaper
09-11-2009, 10:26
IMHO, it will destroy his Presidency, as he is tracking with the far left wing of his party, and any attempt to secure the nation will be opposed by the libs who form the core of his support base.
His moves to release the GITMO detainees, handcuff the CIA, provide rights to those who do not deserve them, and to turn war into a law enforcement operation have clearly marked a departure from aggressively protecting this nation.
I agree that he is making it much easier for the bad guys, and an incident will occur before the end of his term.
When it happens, the voters will probably remember the previous administration and hold the POTUS accountable for his misjudgement.
The real question will be whether we can restore sufficient security quickly enough to keep it from recurring on a regular basis, and disrupting the economy of this nation.
TR
Roguish Lawyer
09-11-2009, 10:26
I think the President will apologize for not be sufficiently apologetic, thereby forcing the terrorists to attack again.
Praetorian
09-11-2009, 10:39
Politically, Obama has taken an AWFUL risk....
Lots of people tried to blame George Bush for the September 11 Attacks.... But it never really stuck, because he'd only been in office 9 months, terrorism had been a low priority on the nations agenda, as a nation we didn't really comprehend the threat and he didn't act any differently than his predecessor. So the left couldn't blame him without blaming Clinton too.
But Obama is out on a limb with no net.
Now the rules are different. WE KNOW THE THREAT.
We know what were up against. But Obama has taken steps that many view as morally superior, but most will also agree make us more vulnerable to attack.... To what degree is impossible to say, UNLESS THERE IS IN FACT AN ATTACK ON U.S. soil, and then it wont matter. Whether what he has changed could have prevented such a hypothetical attack or not becomes irrelevant. Because he didnt do EVERYTHING he could to prevent it.
Now guys like Rahm "I never met a crisis I didnt love" Emanual and Bill "I wish that had been me" Clinton think that a new terrorist attack will necessarily result in higher approval ratings for the President, as they did for Bush. I dont think that will happen again... One thing they miss is poll after poll says the American public trusts Republicans more on national security, so they start off with an uphill climb.... Add to it the affirmative actions to dismantle the national security apparatus Bush put in place, and if I were Obama, I would be very concerned.
I agree it's just a matter of time, and think the next attack will be different, probably closer to what happened in Bombay. Other than killing them overseas before they get here, I am not sure how you defend against 2 or 3 shooters hitting a bunch of random malls or hotels across the country. I'm really scared of a tactical nuke on a cargo ship in a major port.
I'd like to believe something like that would wake America up to the incompetent, dangerous joke this administration is, but I think they spin too well. They will blame the same CIA they are handcuffing for the intelligence failure, and blame Bush for focusing on Iraq when Afghanistan was the key.
I hope I am wrong.
frostfire
09-11-2009, 11:12
Every fabric of my mind concurs with everything ya'll said.
However, my heart and soul hope we are all wrong. There's a dearest person, and I can't stand the thought of her getting hurt. If Beslan scenario were to happen here....:(
TrapLine
09-11-2009, 11:26
IMHO, the question concerning the current administration will be, "Not if but how bad." Will the attack be sufficient to wake those in the middle that seem to have forgotten the events of eight years ago? Will the MSM be able to smooth/spin the event as inevitable regardless of our actions in order to defend their leader? Or as I pray won't happen, will the next one be of a scale that forces people to come to grips with the fact that there are people at war with us and our countrymen who refuse to acknowledge this fact place us in harms way?
After taking more terrorism classes than I ever thought possible while I was away at school, the scenario that I think scares me more than anything else, because it would be so hard to detect, is if they hit us in the heartland.
By that I don't mean the nation at large. My fear is suicide bombers at the mall in downtown Podunck Iowa, or at the county fair in Poughkeepsie, IL, a highschool football game in rural Texas.
I don't know how this nation would react to that kind of scenario, and it scares the hell out of me. I don't want my children to grow up scared of going about their daily lives.
After taking more terrorism classes than I ever thought possible while I was away at school, the scenario that I think scares me more than anything else, because it would be so hard to detect, is if they hit us in the heartland.
By that I don't mean the nation at large. My fear is suicide bombers at the mall in downtown Podunck Iowa, or at the county fair in Poughkeepsie, IL, a highschool football game in rural Texas.
I don't know how this nation would react to that kind of scenario, and it scares the hell out of me. I don't want my children to grow up scared of going about their daily lives.
Or a quiet little utopia of a suburb.
How has U.S. been attack-free?
http://www.cnn.com/video/
Richard
Praetorian
09-11-2009, 13:42
After taking more terrorism classes than I ever thought possible while I was away at school, the scenario that I think scares me more than anything else, because it would be so hard to detect, is if they hit us in the heartland.
By that I don't mean the nation at large. My fear is suicide bombers at the mall in downtown Podunck Iowa, or at the county fair in Poughkeepsie, IL, a highschool football game in rural Texas.
I don't know how this nation would react to that kind of scenario, and it scares the hell out of me. I don't want my children to grow up scared of going about their daily lives.
I think there is a reason why we haven't seen these types of attacks here.... If AQ had any inclination to do that, they could have done it a long time ago.... Thats a simple attack to prepare and pull off and there's little defense for it.
The reason they haven't is because it wouldn't achieve the terrorist goal if it were tried in the U.S.
It works in Israel because Israel is so geographically tiny. Israel is smaller than most large U.S. cities. So ALL events are local.
A guy buys a slice of Sbarros and blows himself up along with a clerk.... That's scary if you buy Pizza there or know somebody who does... But if it happened in Toledo, and you live in Seattle its just "something that happened in a pizza joint in some other state." Its a world away.... And after a couple, it would be as ubiquitous as drive by shootings in Compton..... It would make the local news, and after a while, maybe not even that....
Initially it might be a bit scary, but that would wear off fast. And there HAVE BEEN small individual, local acts of terrorism in the U.S. since 911.... And they are so small and local that the government doesnt categorize them as "terrorism" and nobody paid much attention. For example the El Al shooting at LAX in the summer of 2002. Or the guy driving his car down the sidewalk in San Francisco in 2006..... One was eventually classified as a terrorist attack, and the other perpetrator insists his act WAS terrorism, but the SFPD refuses to agree with him. Either way, nobody is showing any fear of walking down sidewalks....
They want ATTENTION.... And to get attention across the U.S. it has to be BIG!
The other issue is that with 9-11, they shot their wad. If AQ does anything "Small" after that, it will send a message that they are weakened. They created a tough act to follow.
The Reaper
09-11-2009, 13:46
I think you fail to understand the impact of attacking either a large single target of criticality, or multiple simultaneous, or near-simultaneous attacks on less critical targets, like commerce centers.
What impact did the DC sniper, a no- to low-budget op by two untrained individuals have on residents in the DC metro area? What effect would six teams doing that have, in either a single metropolitan area, or in six metropolitan areas across the nation? How badly do you really need to go out and buy something from Home Depot? How badly do they need customers to stay in business?
TR
As Yogi Berra once opined, "It is tough to make predictions - especially about the future."
Richard's $.02 :munchin
They are already attacking us. They are attacking us in the Courts, Political correctness and in the Media. We are being attacked every day.
Warrior-Mentor
09-12-2009, 12:11
After taking more terrorism classes than I ever thought possible while I was away at school, the scenario that I think scares me more than anything else, because it would be so hard to detect, is if they hit us in the heartland.
By that I don't mean the nation at large. My fear is suicide bombers at the mall in downtown Podunck Iowa, or at the county fair in Poughkeepsie, IL, a high school football game in rural Texas.
I don't know how this nation would react to that kind of scenario, and it scares the hell out of me. I don't want my children to grow up scared of going about their daily lives.
Think Mumbai in Elementary and High Schools. Or a dirty bomb at the Pentagon Metro. Or Anthrax in the NYC Subway.
COL(RET) Randy Larsen's book "Our Own Worst Enemy" is an eye opener. So is "Seven Deadly Scenarios" by Andrew Krepinevich.
Dozer523
09-12-2009, 12:14
These are my rhetorical questions.
Rhetorical questions aren't supposed to answer by the reader.
But, the answers are (in no particular order / IMO) no, no, yes, yes, no, no, no, sorta (narrowed down to business or pleasure), yes, no, no, no, probably --usually works that way. :D
Dozer523
09-12-2009, 12:17
Think Mumbai in Elementary and High Schools. Or a dirty bomb at the Pentagon Metro. Or Anthrax in the NYC Subway.
It comes down to logistics in America. Enough bad stuff to draw serious attention is hard to get, hard to store, and hard to move into place. That is one reason why Oklahoma City came as such a surprise.