View Full Version : Increase in threat level
I feel that the latest intel will result in and be because of one or more factors:
1. The threat is real and our response will cause the terrorists to abort.
2. It is a probe to assess our defenses.
3. Is a diversion so another target will be attacked.
Unlike in other parts of the worls where the goal is just death and terror, the AQ seem to be bent upon destroying our financial networks. This makes sense in light of the fact that Singapor is rapidly becoming a financial hub and it is in the heart of Islam.
We don't have enought information to assess the badniks decision making process. I don't believe there is a mastermind orchestrating the attacks. But as its been said, several true believers with different ideas about the ultimate goal. The targeting decisions being made are as numerous as the personnel making them.
I don't think putting all of my chips with probing the defense and causing a diversion for a different attack is what I would do. I dont think the AQ has the kind of personnel, resources, or opportunity to cause a significant diversion.
That said, I do believe we end up chasing a great deal of ghosts. Things get aborted for all sorts of reasons, it takes alot of cajones to carry out a significant attack.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
08-02-2004, 14:01
Originally posted by NG_M4_Shooter
I don't believe there is a mastermind orchestrating the attacks.
I don't think putting all of my chips with probing the defense and causing a diversion for a different attack is what I would do. I dont think the AQ has the kind of personnel, resources, or opportunity to cause a significant diversion.
Well perhaps, but I prefer not to underestimate my enemy and as they have to use an asymetric approach I would imagine that there is centralized planning that have outlined target systems, sensitive nodes to those systems, and broad mission type orders that describe the desired outcome of whatever event is conducted with decentralized execution leaving the method, time (within left and right limits if they want to maximize the effect), and place of attack to the operatives in the field. Remember, just because they have named buildings they may not be going after the building but the systems that support the operations performed by folks in the buildings. You don't have to blow up the stock exchange to shut it down or create chaos. Nor do you have to have sophisticated material to attack any of those targets or supporting systems. In conventional terms, you don't defend a hill by sitting on it. Just a thought and I hope I am wrong.
Jack Moroney
Jack Moroney
Brfore we start talking about ignorant, camel riding, goat fornicators, just sit down and analyze the time, thought, training and coordination to pull off the 9/11 attacks. This operation was sophisticated beyond any one's imagination at the time.
The Reaper
08-02-2004, 14:24
Originally posted by Jack Moroney
Well perhaps, but I prefer not to underestimate my enemy and as they have to use an asymetric approach I would imagine that there is centralized planning that have outlined target systems, sensitive nodes to those systems, and broad mission type orders that describe the desired outcome of whatever event is conducted with decentralized execution leaving the method, time (within left and right limits if they want to maximize the effect), and place of attack to the operatives in the field. Remember, just because they have named buildings they may not be going after the building but the systems that support the operations performed by folks in the buildings. You don't have to blow up the stock exchange to shut it down or create chaos. Nor do you have to have sophisticated material to attack any of those targets or supporting systems. In conventional terms, you don't defend a hill by sitting on it. Just a thought and I hope I am wrong.
Jack Moroney
Jack Moroney
I would do just what you said, and probably have the training to do it right. In less than an hour, I could come up with several different viable COAs to shut down the system without an explosive attack.
We cannot afford to assume that our opponents have any less talent.
TR
Wouldnt it be better to target the petro-chemical industry than the stock exchange?
I would think it would require less resources to attack an industry based primarily in asia. Is it true that any dramatic interruption of the oil industry would cause much more infighting, chaos, mistrust, and discombobulation of the American public (let alone the third world)?
I would imagine that the difficulty of getting and maintaining viable operational cells inside the US is extremely expensive and very risky. Using those same resources in your own back yard, right there in Asia (the Stans, Iraq, Chechnya, etc.) to disrupt the supply of petroleum to world markets is immediately devastating. Not as much press as an attack on US soil, but perhaps a better tactical victory.
Besides, at this stage in the game, I imagine that you would want to help John Kerry win the election. Doing anything on US soil might prevent that.
But I'm just a dumb grunt, in the National Guard. With no tabs and a good imagination. Anyhow, thats my two cents.
Ambush Master
08-02-2004, 14:31
I concur with TR. I have been saying ever since 9-11 that these people are not your common "Terrorists" !! They are highly trained and motivated "Guerrillas" !!!
Also, I would be willing to bet that they have Secondary and possibly Tertiary Targets lined up, just in case the Security gets too tight or hot !!!
The Reaper
08-02-2004, 14:32
Originally posted by NG_M4_Shooter
Wouldnt it be better to target the petro-chemical industry than the stock exchange?
I would think it would require less resources to attack an industry based primarily in asia. Is it true that any dramatic interruption of the oil industry would cause much more infighting, chaos, mistrust, and discombobulation of the American public (let alone the third world)?
I don't think an open internet forum with guests is any place to start debating the relative merits of the infrastructure targets our enemies might attack.
I think you should go study that for a while. Before you post no more.
And have a very SF day.
TR
Nothing more to say about that.
Emergency net agrees with you...
Computer Seized in Pakistan Reveals Plans to Target U.S. and Britain
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN: Pakistani intelligence agents reportedly found plans for new attacks to be carried out against the United States and Britain on a computer seized during the arrest of a senior al-Qaida suspect wanted for the 1998 twin U.S. embassy bombings, Pakistan's information minister said. The plans were found in e-mails on the computer of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian arrested July 25 after a 12-hour gunbattle in the eastern city of Gujrat, Pakistani Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed is quoted by the Associated Press (AP) as saying.
Ahmed would not confirm whether the information is what prompted U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to issue a warning Sunday about a possible al-Qaida attack on prominent financial institutions in New York, Washington and Newark, N.J.
Other sources pointed to the alleged arrest of 25-year-old computer engineer named Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan (a.k.a. Abu Talha?), who may have been one of the sources of information about threats in the United States. Khan is reportedly a communications specialist who used coded messages to help manage Al-Qaeda world-wide operations. Khan's capture and/or cooperation has not been officially confirmed in Washington. Investigation of the captured data continues at the time of this report...
1. In this specific instance, I fee that the threat is real and well supported with documentary evidence
2. I concur with TR
3. I commend the current administration for being specific in their information and their concentratrated efforts and attentions
4. If the intel does indeed stem from the capture of the computer engineer then it is indeed a "treasure trove." (Note: the rules exist and they make sense - FOR USERS - that said, admins are log junkies and pack rats (redundancy, redundacy, redundancy!) - the potential here for tracing the from/to lines of communication is incredible.)
I would think the intel groups are ecstatic less for the value of found documents, (although it does certainly appear as if the data is useful in the immediate future,) than for the potential for monitoring comminications henceforth. I know if I was an intel weenie, I'd be thanking the spirits for hitting the motherlode right about now.
The best part of this scenario is that one terrorist out there doesn't read forums or the news and in bound to f***-up. I fully aniticpate that the fragile house of cards will be tumbling hither & thither in the next few months as a result of this.
Wake up call - better pre than post trauma.
p.s. Kerry? It does appear that he is miffed with Dean's comments.
:D
The Reaper
08-02-2004, 20:09
I would remind all that we have to bat 1.000.
The bad guys only have to get lucky once in a while.
TR
Originally posted by The Reaper
I would remind all that we have to bat 1.000.
The bad guys only have to get lucky once in a while.
TR
Ours stated...
"The enemy only has to win one time".
"We must win every time"!
Complacency kills!