A Little Bit of Sanity

[johnc]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3079

 

“All Americans Should Fear Terrorism”

 

That’s ridiculous. The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are minuscule. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the odds are about 1 in 88,000. The odds of dying from falling off a ladder are 1 in 10,010. Even in 2001, automobile crashes killed 15 times more Americans than terrorism. Heart disease, cancer, and strokes are the leading causes of death in the United States—not terrorism.

 

“Terrorists Can Strike Any Place, Any Time, with Any Weapon”

 

Unlikely. This assertion is the guiding principle of our homeland security strategy, yet it ignores probability. When the U.S. Department of Homeland Security dispenses such silly advice as, “Ensure disaster supply kit is stocked and ready,” or “During a nuclear incident, it is important to avoid radioactive material, if possible,” it assumes all Americans face an equal threat and creates widespread fear without making America safer. The department should focus more on what is probable and less on what is possible.

 

Most Americans are safe from terrorist attack. And the most likely forms of attack remain conventional. The fact is, all terrorist attempts to use chemical and biological weapons have failed to cause mass casualties. True, a successful biological weapons attack could kill hundreds of thousands of people. But manufacturing, controlling, and successfully dispersing these agents is difficult—probably too difficult for today’s terrorist groups. Synthesizing and handling chemical agents such as the deadly nerve agent VX, sarin, or mustard gas is complicated and extremely dangerous, often requiring access to sophisticated chemical laboratories. Most experts agree, for instance, that al Qaeda does not possess the technical capability necessary to produce VX. And even if terrorists procure and deploy chemical weapons, they are unlikely to kill many people. The 1995 sarin attack in Tokyo’s subway system was limited to only 12 deaths. Official U.S. government reports, including that of the Gilmore Commission, which examines domestic responses to terrorism, show that it would take one ton of chemical agent, favorable weather, and considerable time to kill thousands of people with chemical weapons.

 

This is to say nothing of the fact that no terrorist organization is known to possess nuclear weapons. Even for nations with the requisite monetary resources and scientific infrastructure, building a nuclear weapon can take decades. Yes, terrorists might try to buy a stolen nuclear weapon or its parts on the black market. But the chances of terrorists heisting a working nuclear weapon or assembling one from stolen parts are low. Most nuclear weapons require delivery vehicles and activation codes. Stealing all of these elements is next to impossible. Smaller, more portable tactical nuclear weapons, especially those made by the former Soviet Union, are a greater danger. Yet, according to a 2002 report by the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, most of Russia’s portable nuclear weapons are probably inoperable today. What about dirty bombs? They are relatively easy to construct, but much less destructive. Depending upon variables such as wind direction and the speed of evacuation, a dirty bomb might not be any more deadly than a conventional bomb.

 

“Al Qaeda Remains the Largest Threat to U.S. Homeland Security”

 

Wrong. The organization bin Laden continues to run from Afghanistan or Pakistan is on the ropes. Today, the main threat to the United States comes in the form of extremist entrepreneurs with only tenuous links to bin Laden and from other Sunni terrorist groups. These groups include Ansar al Islam, Egypt’s Jamaat al–Islamiyya and Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Southeast Asia’s Jemaah Islamiah, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Algeria’s Salifist Group for Preaching and War, the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, Zarqawi’s Tawhid and Jihad, and a host of others.

 

The press often blithely refers to these groups as “al Qaeda linked.” But the links refer to sympathy and personal contacts that date back years, not continuous communications, planning, or operational control. These groups can be referred to as a movement, but that does not mean that they are part of a unified organization. For instance, though communications between Zarqawi and bin Laden have reportedly been intercepted, their relationship is a loose alliance, not one that involves handing down orders or sharing finances.

 

Most of the large terrorist attacks carried out since September 11 have had little connection to al Qaeda’s leadership. The recent attacks in Bali, Turkey, and Spain were independent operations conducted by local extremists. Consider Madrid. The press still commonly calls the commuter train bombing there on March 11, 2004, an “al Qaeda attack.” But most recent evidence indicates that it was carried out by local Muslims, mostly Moroccans, who had some contacts with the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, but little or no connection to bin Laden or Zarqawi. The Madrid attackers planned and executed their attack without training, orders, or material assistance from other terrorist groups.

[BrandonsZ]

al Qaeda should sell heroin and meth at rock bottom prices.

 

That'll kill more people than piddly bombs and gas, cost less, and put our economy in the crapper litterally.

[Guest Battle Pope]

That's what I don't understand about our counrry. America has turned into a country based on fear and insecurity, and the government and media is loving every minute of it.

[2126]

That's what I don't understand about our counrry. America has turned into a country based on fear and insecurity, and the government and media is loving every minute of it.

 

Well, it's certainly a money maker!!! For some, anyway. Sheople, run for your lives, the boogie man is goin to get you! And they run! I can't wait till the poop hits the fan. Are you ready!

[Michael]

Stoking fear is every government's best instrument in making the public easier to govern. Fear causes people to willingly surrender privacy, liberty and self-determination to a central authority. Which is exactly what any self-respecting central authority wants!

 

After all, a frightened public is more likely to reelect leaders who promise to "stay the course".

[Guest JAMIE T]

The last thing I'm worried about is a freakin terrorist. Those freakin hillbillies in the mountains of Afganistan... Thier idea of a tank is a freakin 80's toyota pick-up with 4 guys in the back with AK47's. Who the **** do they think they are to TRY and make me fearfull of their sorry asses. Imagine the road race course that we could build in afganistan...

[BrandonsZ]

I think after every terrorist attack, the USA should capture and torture 1000 rebels on international news. After a few more hits, there wouldn't be anyone left to cause trouble.

 

Maybe that's why nobody picks on China, 'cause they'd do something like that.

[280zwitha383]

Stoking fear is every government's best instrument in making the public easier to govern. Fear causes people to willingly surrender privacy' date=' liberty and self-determination to a central authority. Which is exactly what any self-respecting central authority wants!

 

After all, a frightened public is more likely to reelect leaders who promise to "stay the course".[/quote']

 

Exactly, people who are willing to give up their freedoms (even though they are probably too ignorant to realize they are doing so), and GM putting onstar in their vehicles are what scares me most about our society

[BrandonsZ]

Exactly, people who are willing to give up their freedoms (even though they are probably too ignorant to realize they are doing so), and GM putting onstar in their vehicles are what scares me most about our society

 

"ONSTAR has just detected that you have used profanity in public, your car will now be shut off and police have been notifed. Your doors are locked and cannot be unlocked currently for your own protection. Have a nice day."

[crazy280]

Yeah, the funny thing is that the parts of America MOST succeptible to terrorist attacks (the coasts and urban centers) did NOT vote for Bush in 2004. We don't feel safer with him as pres. lol

[johnc]

Yeah, the funny thing is that the parts of America MOST succeptible to terrorist attacks (the coasts and urban centers) did NOT vote for Bush in 2004. We don't feel safer with him as pres.

 

Well... no. The majority of the people in CA and NY did not vote for Bush, but that still leaves tens of millions of people in each of those states that did vote for Bush. Don't color me blue just because I live in a blue state.

[Brad-ManQ45]

Fear is the great tamer of sheeple.

 

I disagree with the statement that a chemical attack would be beyond the capabilities of the terrorists.

 

A very effective gas is simply made by combining ammonia and chlorine. Pretty much like mustard gas.

[BrandonsZ]

Fear is the great tamer of sheeple.

 

I disagree with the statement that a chemical attack would be beyond the capabilities of the terrorists.

 

A very effective gas is simply made by combining ammonia and chlorine. Pretty much like mustard gas.

 

I think I made this when I accidently mixed the wrong pool chemicals. It was yellow smoke, very hot, and smelled like death. Good thing I was outside! It ate the cup I had it in.