Why would terrorists attempt to board a plane in 2011 when there are other ways?

[Liberator21]

Lol, don't want to sound "pro-terrorist" or anything. It's just that this idea of turban wearing terrorists getting on a plane and trying to blow it up is...well, a decade old. It seems unlikely that a plan that worked on one day 10 years ago would be the focus of today. I know there was the underwear bomber, but instead of groping 6 year old kids when they're on their way to see grandma shouldn't we be devoting our resources to shipping ports, and this little thing called the southern boarder?

It all seems like a big farce to me, the amped-up security is creating fear in the minds of travelers that Al-Qaeda is just a stone's throw away and that maybe it's a good thing the TSA rubbed my balls for a little while. The truth is, YES they are out there and YES they want us dead. But for the most part they're stuck in caves and would surely use their limited resources in far easier scenarios than to try an "old hat" trick like hijacking an airplane. Fact is the vast majority of shipping containers go unchecked and a stroll along the Mexico boarder reveals some glaring omissions in our "war on terror". This isn't a troll thread btw, flame me if you want, it just doesn't make much sense.

 

[drebo]

They wouldn't. They've already won, they don't need to do anything else and their goal of altering our lifestyle has already succeeded.

 

[Jaskalas]

They wouldn't. They've already won, they don't need to do anything else and their goal of altering our lifestyle has already succeeded.

If we hunt down terrorists for altering our lifestyle, can we do the same to the politicians who did it for them?

 

[Jaskalas]

Why would terrorists attempt to board a plane in 2011 when there are other ways?

Don't worry, TSA is coming to a train station near you. Shopping malls and sporting events after that.

Hell, if you want to leave your house you might as well get checked for STDs by your doctor cause your balls are going to be seeing a lot of action. There are no virgins in America, not after our administration gets done with you.

 

[dainthomas]

What are you, a communist? You'll take your "freedom fondle", and you'll like it.

 

[Modelworks]

I said it before but if terrorist wanted to cause more fear than any plane blowing up all they have to do is start blowing up random targets in different states, McDonlads, walmarts, etc. That would scare people more than anything. And with the border so easily crossed I am surprised they haven't.

 

[JimW1949]

I agree that it is unlikely a terrorist would try another airplane attack again, but still, it never hurts to keep a watchful eye out for it.

While there is certainly something to be worried about with terrorists smuggling a WMD into this country across the North and the South borders, I still think the East and West Coasts are where the biggest threat lies.

Think about it for a moment. A foreign fishing boat is several miles out along the East Coast or the West Coast, in international waters. It is a dark moonless night. A small boat with a very quiet outboard motor is lowered over the side. A guy gets in the boat with a small suitcase nuclear weapon and a bicycle. He heads for shore in an isolated area and arrives at maybe 2am when everyone is asleep. He leaves the boat hidden as best he can, grabs the suitcase with the nuclear weapon, gets on the bicycle and heads toward the nearest town.

He meets up with another member of the terrorist organization who is driving a car. Together they drive to a major city and plant the bomb in a place where it is very unlikely to be found. They set the timer for maybe 12 hours and leave. They jump in their car and are long gone before the nuclear weapon detonates.

In the above scenario, how would we be able to prevent it? There are so many ways to smuggle WMD into this country, and I believe the East and West coasts are an easier way to do it rather than the Canadian or the Mexican borders. I am not saying we shouldn't watch those borders carefully too, I am just I think it would be easier for a terrorist to use the East Coast or the West Coast.

Because we have thousands of miles of border to guard, keeping the United States safe is a very difficult job, and I would have to say that for all practical purposes, it is an impossible task. No matter how careful we are, no matter how many people we have guarding our borders, sooner or later we are going to miss something. I think it is inevitable that we will get hit again by terrorists. It is like the Earth getting hit with a chunk of space debris, it isn't so much a matter of "Will" it hit the Earth, it is just a matter of "When".

 

[Modelworks]

Think about it for a moment. A foreign fishing boat is several miles out along the East Coast or the West Coast, in international waters. It is a dark moonless night. A small boat with a very quiet outboard motor is lowered over the side. A guy gets in the boat with a small suitcase nuclear weapon and a bicycle. He heads for shore in an isolated area and arrives at maybe 2am when everyone is asleep. He leaves the boat hidden as best he can, grabs the suitcase with the nuclear weapon, gets on the bicycle and heads toward the nearest town.

The reason that wouldn't be likely is because the coast is actually better gaurded than the borders. If you hang out around areas that have a lot of fishing boats you will find that the coast guard is pretty good at stopping boats and unlike on land with police they don't have to have proabable cause to do it. They can see a boat and stop it for routine safety inspection if they want. You also have a fleet of subs that routinely patrol the coastline as well as multiple sonar bases. The sonar detection has recently been increased due to drug cartels now trying to use man made subs for drug smuggling. Add to that satellites that are stationary over the oceans that take multiple images per second and it is pretty well covered. The water requires a decent sized boat to get close enough to deploy something smaller so it isn't like they can use a small outboard motor and boat to get here. The military also has LEO satellites over the coast line that have radar used to detect air and boats.

The problem with the borders is the people are on land and individual people are hard to track compared to large boats or planes.

 

[manlymatt83]

They wouldn't. They've already won, they don't need to do anything else and their goal of altering our lifestyle has already succeeded.

this

 

[JimW1949]

Not to start a big debate about this, but it seems to me that even if satellites picked up a small boat heading for shore and the Coast Guard was contacted, it would take some amount time for the Coast Guard to get there. I mean let's fact it, the Coast Guard can't be everywhere at once. If it were timed right, I would have to think a small boat could make it to shore rather easily.

Also, the Coast Guard would have no way of knowing why the small boat was heading for shore. For all they know, the boat could be taking someone to the hospital. I think you are also assuming the satellites would pick up the small boat immediately when it leave the fishing boat. It is certainly possible the satellites would be pointed right at that particular fishing boat when the small boat takes off, but with all the coastline to search, I don't think that would be likely to happen. By the time the satellites see the small boat, it may very well be halfway to shore, or even further that halfway. The Coast Guard may have only a few minutes to respond and apprehend the terrorist.

Anyway, you could be right and I could be dead wrong. But it just seems to me that a small boat traveling quickly on a dark night would be difficult for the Coast Guard to get to and apprehend the terrorist before he gets on land. But I am certainly not an expert on Coast Guard procedures and tactics so I don't really know. I am only speculating although it does seem feasible, at least to my mind, that the small boat scenario would work quite well.

 

[lord_emperor]

I'm just glad they're so stupid.

The first time they had a couple guys with knives hijack the plane, now it's unlikely they'll get on board with a knife (or a bottle of water or their dignity...).

If they wanted to hijack a plane again, they'd just have to get more people onto it, a bunch of stewardesses and passengers won't be able to stop 20 determined guys.

 

[Modelworks]

Not to start a big debate about this, but it seems to me that even if satellites picked up a small boat heading for shore and the Coast Guard was contacted, it would take some amount time for the Coast Guard to get there. I mean let's fact it, the Coast Guard can't be everywhere at once. If it were timed right, I would have to think a small boat could make it to shore rather easily.

The small boat has to come from a big boat to survive out on the ocean. The Coast Guard watches for any craft that exits international waters and enters US waters. Anything that enters shows up. It is so sensitive that it is rumored that the leo radar can pick up a soda can floating on the ocean. Drug runners wouldn't have switched to trying out subs if boats were so easy.

 

[Fern]

It seems to me that air planes/air travel is an important target for terrorists because it's an important travel method that we use frequently, more so than others in different countries.

IMO, if we stopped guarding it they would attack it again.

Blowing up a shipping container has zero affect it terms of terrifying people. Who really cares if you blow some cheap chinese crap being shipped here?

The whole problem with the senario of a small boat launched off our coast is how the small boats even gets there to begin with. They'd have to cross the ocean in a larger boat. Where would they launch it from? Somewhere in the far eastern part of the Med?

Anyway, I think it unlikely they (mothership) could approach our coast without being detected.

Fern

 

[Nebor]

The Coast Guard can't be everywhere at once... That's why they have F16s.

Also, I'm pretty sure terrorists aren't going to be getting their hands on a fabled "suitcase nuke" anytime soon.

 

[Nebor]

I'm just glad they're so stupid.

The first time they had a couple guys with knives hijack the plane, now it's unlikely they'll get on board with a knife (or a bottle of water or their dignity...).

If they wanted to hijack a plane again, they'd just have to get more people onto it, a bunch of stewardesses and passengers won't be able to stop 20 determined guys.

Putting aside the fact that their cost (20 guys) would be pretty high, considering the limited number of people that are willing to die for their cause, I think everyone on the plane would fight them. Also, I don't think you'd see any hesitation to shoot down a hijacked plane like there was on 9/11.

 

[Doppel]

They wouldn't. There are thousands of other targets. The reason they haven't hit busses, trains, malls is because they do not care and/or are as stupid as I'm often led to conclude. The whole threat of terrorism to the US is literally over blown and yes I say that despite 911.

 

[Fern]

Hijacking a plane strikes me as one of the more risky and likely least effective way to attack airlines.

Just plant people in the luggage dept where they load stuff on the plane prior to departure and have them put a bomb onboard in the cargo bay. Or plant them in any one of the other services that have access to planes (food, cleaning, mechanics etc)

Fern

 

[Doppel]

Hijacking a plane strikes me as one of the more risky and likely least effective way to attack airlines.

Just plant people in the luggage dept where they load stuff on the plane prior to departure and have them put a bomb onboard in the cargo bay. Or plant them in any one of the other services that have access to planes (food, cleaning, mechanics etc)

Fern

Hijacking is done. It's finished. Unless a terrorist gets on there literally with firearms or enough slashing & stabbing weapons to stop wave after wave of passenger it's a technique that will never work again in the US. I guess a tiny airplane filled with geriatrics maybe, but these days if you so much as look at another passenger funny it's like football practice, everyone else on the plane wants to get in on the action.

 

[Scotteq]

Hijacking a plane strikes me as one of the more risky and likely least effective way to attack airlines.

Just plant people in the luggage dept where they load stuff on the plane prior to departure and have them put a bomb onboard in the cargo bay. Or plant them in any one of the other services that have access to planes (food, cleaning, mechanics etc)

Fern

At this juncture, if Terror is really the object... I don't see hijacking as the best means any more.


If a Terrorist were to do something now - A Van and an RPG near one end of the runway.

Major Sports Event, Cropduster, and some chemical agents

Hell - a couple teams of riflemen in a car/van/suv driving around the country with a pair of dice: Get up in the morning, roll a 2 or 7 = shoot someone. Otherwise, keep driving.

 

[BoberFett]

They wouldn't. There are thousands of other targets. The reason they haven't hit busses, trains, malls is because they do not care and/or are as stupid as I'm often led to conclude. The whole threat of terrorism to the US is literally over blown and yes I say that despite 911.

Yep.

America has collectively shat itself like a bunch of frightened children over a barely-existent threat.

 

[shortylickens]

Before 9/11 security was a joke.
After 9/11, security is an overpriced joke.

If I were a desperate religious zealot, it would be worth the risk to occasionally test the waters.