******POLL******* Why haven't we had a terrorist attack on US soil yet?

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
I think our intelligence services are doing the best they can to foil new attacks, but also that we've just been pretty lucky so far.
 

busmaster11

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2000
2,875
0
0
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
I think our intelligence services are doing the best they can to foil new attacks, but also that we've just been pretty lucky so far.

What do you mean lucky? That most of the time, intelligence has been in the right place at the right time?

I don't quite understand that, because if its luck, then even if one scheme falls through, we would have been attacked.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
The US has made terrorists attacks more difficult, but not impossible. Anything less than the WTC would be anticlimatic, and if they are going to risk exposure and capture, the attack has to be even more shocking. Opportunities for this are few, and must be timed right. In other words, the time is not now.

Besides, one attack caused so much mayhem. The antics of Ashcroft are either encouraged, or at least tolerated, when a little while ago they would not. The US was drawn into a war in Iraq, which was a goal of Bin Laden.

People still fear. People still want to lash out. The WTC achieved results beyond Bin Ladens wildest dreams. Perhaps another thought on Al Queda collective mind is to let the last attack fully bear fruit.
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
How about "Terrorist attacks on US soil always have been and will be so difficult to carry out that they occur very rarely". Think about it. How many times has Al Qaeda struck on US soil? Once. How many times in total have Muslim terrorists attacked us on US soil? Twice. How many times in the last decade have any terrorists struck on US soil? Three times. In fact, I don't know of any terrorist attack on US soil before the 1993 WTC bombing that occured since WW2.
 

busmaster11

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2000
2,875
0
0
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
How about "Terrorist attacks on US soil always have been and will be so difficult to carry out that they occur very rarely". Think about it. How many times has Al Qaeda struck on US soil? Once. How many times in total have Muslim terrorists attacked us on US soil? Twice. How many times in the last decade have any terrorists struck on US soil? Three times. In fact, I don't know of any terrorist attack on US soil before the 1993 WTC bombing that occured since WW2.

Why are they so difficult? I don't necessarily disagree, I just don't understand how. I mean, what keeps a cell from coordinating random sniper attacks across the country - over a long period of time? That will create as much terror as anything.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
How about "Terrorist attacks on US soil always have been and will be so difficult to carry out that they occur very rarely". Think about it. How many times has Al Qaeda struck on US soil? Once. How many times in total have Muslim terrorists attacked us on US soil? Twice. How many times in the last decade have any terrorists struck on US soil? Three times. In fact, I don't know of any terrorist attack on US soil before the 1993 WTC bombing that occured since WW2.

Why are they so difficult? I don't necessarily disagree, I just don't understand how. I mean, what keeps a cell from coordinating random sniper attacks across the country - over a long period of time? That will create as much terror as anything.
You're correct in that random sniper attacks would cause widespread panic, however they would not live up to Al Qaeda's desire for spectacular attacks on symbolic targets causing massive casualties. Al Qaeda's MO is to thoroughly research and gather information on their target(s), often spending years developing a particular plot. They're difficult for US counter-terrorist efforts to detect precisely because AQ spends so much time and effort in the planning stages. That also accounts for the often lengthy delays between operations.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
How about "Terrorist attacks on US soil always have been and will be so difficult to carry out that they occur very rarely". Think about it. How many times has Al Qaeda struck on US soil? Once. How many times in total have Muslim terrorists attacked us on US soil? Twice. How many times in the last decade have any terrorists struck on US soil? Three times. In fact, I don't know of any terrorist attack on US soil before the 1993 WTC bombing that occured since WW2.

Why are they so difficult? I don't necessarily disagree, I just don't understand how. I mean, what keeps a cell from coordinating random sniper attacks across the country - over a long period of time? That will create as much terror as anything.


Remember that typical Al Quedas are not white bread people. They ARE noticed if they are in unexpected places. Also, as I meant to imply, terror is more than scaring people. It is about dominating their psyche, and making them go where you want them, even it they think it is their idea. It has purpose besides fear. It sends messages. It is a political tool. COULD they start sniping a la Malvo? Of course, and they may yet, but it will be because it is part of a larger program.
 

busmaster11

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2000
2,875
0
0
You two made some good points...

But I would still think that Al Qaeda would relish this widespead panic of sniper attacks, and not being their "MO" doesn't exactly comfort you since terror is what they're about...

And as for looking out of place, possibly... But America is a diverse land, and there are Middle Eastern people and African American people all over, and if you were to stay in a car with an accomplice, I wouldn't think its too hard to get the job done in any town, much less any city.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: busmaster11
You two made some good points...

But I would still think that Al Qaeda would relish this widespread panic of sniper attacks, and not being their "MO" doesn't exactly comfort you since terror is what they're about...

And as for looking out of place, possibly... But America is a diverse land, and there are Middle Eastern people and African American people all over, and if you were to stay in a car with an accomplice, I wouldn't think its too hard to get the job done in any town, much less any city.

I do think they would absolutely love the fear they generate. Kind of hard to put into words, but I will give it a go. Terror is not something they pull out of a hat in order to frighten the kiddies. They look at it like a sculptor looks at a chisel. Using the right one in the right way creates a piece of art. A masterpiece. Using a sledgehammer also reshapes the marble, but in a less satisfying way. The goal isn't terror, no more than the chisel is to the sculptor or lathe to a furniture maker. It is the end results of the proper use of these tools that achieves a desirable goal with an aesthetic satisfaction. To Bin Laden, terror isn't an end, it's a means to achieve an artistic vision of misery. It makes his "art form" possible.

No, I get no satisfaction in that.



I agree that people can move without being seen, but it makes things more difficult, not impossible. More caution is required on their part.
 
D

Deleted member 4644

You need another option like:

Various actions have thwarted most of the attacks, others have been stopped by citizens, and others have been stopped by a lack of desire/will.
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
I think most attacks have been thwarted (like the shoe bomber) and the terrorists aren't as capable as people give them credit for. I don't understand why so many people believe in "Neither. Terrorists are at work in this country..." because if the terrorist could attack right now with big effect, they would certainly do so!
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: zephyrprime
I think most attacks have been thwarted (like the shoe bomber) and the terrorists aren't as capable as people give them credit for. I don't understand why so many people believe in "Neither. Terrorists are at work in this country..." because if the terrorist could attack right now with big effect, they would certainly do so!
Not even Under Furher Cheney shares your optimism
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
They're attacks are succeeding daily. The United States is divided and in chaos. Our rulers strip away the very fabric of America in a useless attempt to 'secure' us. Our youth have no hope, no direction but to serve themselves. People live in fear guided by a color chart. No explosive devices could do the damage our own fear has done. They're sitting somewhere, perfectly safe, drinking a caffeine free moccha and laughing at the ruination of the American dream.
 

busmaster11

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2000
2,875
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
They're attacks are succeeding daily. The United States is divided and in chaos. Our rulers strip away the very fabric of America in a useless attempt to 'secure' us. Our youth have no hope, no direction but to serve themselves. People live in fear guided by a color chart. No explosive devices could do the damage our own fear has done. They're sitting somewhere, perfectly safe, drinking a caffeine free moccha and laughing at the ruination of the American dream.

I wouldn't quite go that far, but 14 of 22 people so far don't believe we're safe here today. That is very telling.
 

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2001
4,260
0
0
several plots have been "thwarted"

a car full of explosives headed for L.A was stopped at the Canadian border
The shoe bomber was caught
the Padilla dude (dirty bomb builder) was apprehended
the recent Air France flights to LA weres stopped

the single best defense is a strong offense..by taking the war on terror to Afganistan and Iraq, the terrorists are fighting our troops abroad, rather than us at home.

which would you prefer?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
several plots have been "thwarted"

a car full of explosives headed for L.A was stopped at the Canadian border
The shoe bomber was caught
the Padilla dude (dirty bomb builder) was apprehended
the recent Air France flights to LA weres stopped

the single best defense is a strong offense..by taking the war on terror to Afganistan and Iraq, the terrorists are fighting our troops abroad, rather than us at home.

which would you prefer?

Nice. Wrong, but nice. I doubt they all flew out to fight in Iraq.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
They're attacks are succeeding daily. The United States is divided and in chaos. Our rulers strip away the very fabric of America in a useless attempt to 'secure' us. Our youth have no hope, no direction but to serve themselves. People live in fear guided by a color chart. No explosive devices could do the damage our own fear has done. They're sitting somewhere, perfectly safe, drinking a caffeine free moccha and laughing at the ruination of the American dream.


Milk and sugar with that?
 

Bitdog

Member
Dec 3, 2003
143
0
0
A terrorist involved in a conversation about children, hung his head and said "they blow up so fast".
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,860
6,396
126
Originally posted by: Bitdog
A terrorist involved in a conversation about children, hung his head and said "they blow up so fast".

ROFL, sick, but funny. :beer:
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,860
6,396
126
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
several plots have been "thwarted"

a car full of explosives headed for L.A was stopped at the Canadian border
The shoe bomber was caught
the Padilla dude (dirty bomb builder) was apprehended
the recent Air France flights to LA weres stopped

the single best defense is a strong offense..by taking the war on terror to Afganistan and Iraq, the terrorists are fighting our troops abroad, rather than us at home.

which would you prefer?

I don't recall the date, but was Bush even President then?
 

gaga38

Member
Apr 15, 2003
33
0
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
several plots have been "thwarted"

a car full of explosives headed for L.A was stopped at the Canadian border
The shoe bomber was caught
the Padilla dude (dirty bomb builder) was apprehended
the recent Air France flights to LA weres stopped

the single best defense is a strong offense..by taking the war on terror to Afganistan and Iraq, the terrorists are fighting our troops abroad, rather than us at home.

which would you prefer?

lol
it was shown that the so-called air france flights warning was not a plot at all
but it served its purpose : show american ppl that they are still in danger and that intelligence is very powerful lol
and for the car full of explosives do you have a link

my opinion is that the gvt does all he can do to keep the level of alert high in order to have a national support
to achieve a terrorist action is a long way