SwiftVets.com

[spudhorse]

It seems to me that there's a huge guerrilla in the room that's almost too unpleasant to talk about. But since he woke me up this morning, I thought I'd pose the topic.

It seems obvious to me that al Queda will attack in the U.S. before the November election. I believe this because there's no downside for them and there's plenty of evidence for a huge upside. If an attack swings a close election to Kerry, they win. They demonstrate their power and have a president who's already given the time table for leaving Iraq. If it doesn't, they're no worse off than they are today. Worse case you have a bunch or martyrs and you're still being attacked by the U.S. just like you have been.

The election in Spain certainly shows that an attack could swing things in their favor and the Philippines pull out over a single hostage is further evidence of how a country might back down from force or threat.

The obvious time to attack is a couple of weeks before the election so that President Bush doesn't really have time to respond but Kerry has time to try to convince people it wouldn't have happened if he were president.

My questions for you:
1) Do you agree with my thesis that there's really no reason for them NOT to attack (assuming, of course, they've been able to pull something together over the last 4 years)?
2) Assuming al Queda did attack and was successful in some significant way, what effect do you believe it would have on the election?
3) The Bush Administration has certainly thought of this scenario. What are our options in responding to such an attack? Do we just keep on doing what we're doing or is there some level of escalation? I'm asking this from a military perspective not a political perspective (although I suppose there's always an international political perspective as well).

[spudhorse]

Thought I'd bump this one time to see if anyone's interested in replying. Now that W seems to have a lead in the race, I think it's even more likely that al Queda will attempt an attack. They just don't have anything to lose.

Mark

[300zxuser]

I think we hurt them more than we know. It's been a while since we heard from ole Bin Laden himself, (Before Sept 11,2003) May be having trouble with diabetes or whatever else disease he was supposed to have. I doubt that living in the mountains near Tora Bora has very good (if any) hospital conditions nearby. Probably doesn't have a good HMO either!
He could have struck in 2002 and 2003, but didn't. I don't think the election is as important to him as it is to us. If he does strike, we will retaliate like hell hath no fury. Remember, Bush (if not elected) won't be out of office till January. So he still has control of the reins.
I am confident he will win though.
_________________
Bob Bruno

[ccr]

Will attack and want to attack are two different things.

No question, AQ wants a spectacular US attack prior to the election. The video released yesterday is likely a strike signal.

However, we have significantly damaged their operational capabilities.

We had many major successes over the summer rolling up terrorist cells. Their ability to move, shoot and communicate is not what it was.
_________________
Whose side is John Kerry really on? Take this quiz and decide for yourself.

http://www.learnthat.com/quiz/

[CandiM]

I've already said repeatedly that it isn't a matter of if they'll attack again, but where and when and how--I have little doubt that they'll try again before the election and, sadly, I think their chances of success are better than our chances of stopping them--As has been said by much smarter folks than me, in order for us to prevent an attack, we have to be right every single time, but for them to succeed, they only have to be right once--Even if our intelligence prevent a serious attack before 2 November, they'll keep trying, learning from their mistakes, until they manage to stay under the radar on one--

Sad, but true--And when it happens, I just hope that we'll have someone in the White House with sufficient spine to do what needs to be done--If we roll over and play dead just once, the consequences would probably be too horrific to consider--C
_________________
“I haven’t seen anyone milk this much out of a bad boat ride since Gilligan” -- Dennis Miller

[300zxuser]

My money is on us. I'd wager we see no significant problems from now to January. At least I hope we don't have. We have elevated the terror warning 217 times since 9/11 and not one problem since. The gov't is not telling you everything and you are much more secure than you think you are. If you are still on the kick "It not a matter of if, but when, I'd have to say "Hey, we're all going to die. Its not a matter "if" but "when" Death and taxes. Everything else is negotiable. Stay positive,we have our guard up, whether you want to believe that or not. Look what knucklehead did in the Oklahoma city bombing? He wasn't AQ , just nuts. We'll deal with it when anything happens, but give the gov't more credit.
What you don't know may help you.
_________________
Bob Bruno

[spudhorse]

It goes without saying that I pray all of you who said that al Qaeda won't attack are right.

However, here's an article from the Washington Post on the subject:
Al Qaeda seen planning for 'spectacular' attack

The thesis here is that:

[buffman]

After extensive reading on this subject, I think there may be as many as 2,000 terrorist types already in the US. Some of this is homegrown from the underground Brotherhood in local mosques, some of this is through our sometimes porous borders. There is plenty of money for these guys to buy stuff on the black market, lots of weapons have been stolen from major military bases. Once when I was in a counterterrorist school the instructor showed a video of young children putting on a show, marching around with wooden guns and Islamic banners, shouting virulent anti-Israel and American slogans. When the tape finished, the instructor asked us to guess where this tape was filmed. Of course most said Arab countries, come to find out it was right here in the good old USA, in New Jersey.
_________________
Never Ever Give Up
America First

[jataylor11]

Drudge report today --- another attack expected through January.

I do believe that they will try something in the US. I am afraid that it will be something akin to Breslen Russia and that frightens me. Given the liberal twist of most public school teachers and administrators I don't trust them to be sufficiently aware of the evil to even begin to fight. School teachers and administrators think the evil is having God in the class room. I wonder how much they would pray for God's help in an attack such as Breslen.

Even though I work in DC I do not worry about my own safety. I worry about the little children.

[spudhorse]

To follow on to Buffman's comment -- the really scary thing is that it doesn't take a large number of people if your goal is to kill as many innocent people as you possibly can. In Russia it was 32 terrorists which actually struck me as somewhat inefficient. If all you did 24/7 was work on the question of 'How can we kill as many people as possible in the least amount of time with the lowest risk of failure and with the fewest number of people?,' a number of very viable targets would easily present themselves.

My question and concern (beyond the obvious possibility of horror) is on the consequences to the election. Would such an event turn the election to Kerry or would the country rally around the President?

[shawa]

I think that if we're attacked (God forbid) then Bush wins.

Look at the polls. On the question of who has the best
leadership qualities, it's 2 to 1 for Bush.

After an attack, people are looking to a proven leader.
Given what the polls are reflecting,I can't imagine that
they can possibly think that Kerry would be better.

The election would go to Bush.

[azpatriot]

I know this is just my opinion…..

But I think another attack on our mainland will only solidify the country behind Bush, it will be positive irrefutable evidence that the Terrorist threat has not gone away from within our borders. It will unite the people of this country just as the 9/11 attacks did. Any doubt about us chasing the terrorists into remaining countries harboring them like Syria and Iran will completely fade away. The sentiment will be “Let’s go get them wherever they are!”

My wife and I pray that there will be no more attacks upon our nation, here at home or with any of our allies. But we are also realists and fully understand, that it only takes ONE demonic suicidal lunatic to accomplish a mission of death and terror.

As an example of how difficult it is to protect ourselves think of this. There, is on this planet, one nation that is probably beyond any doubt the absolute expert at fighting suicidal Islamoterrorist groups, they have been at it for far longer than any of us and they are attacked almost every single day. That nation is Israel.

Now for those of you that have access to a LARGE map of the world, I want you to find Israel, and place your thumb over it. Notice how you can completely cover this tiny nation with your thumb. Now look at our nation and notice you can’t cover it with even both of your hands.

Israel’s borders are small, if any nation had truly defensible borders it’s Israel and yet they can’t even stop the attacks.

What makes us think, especially John Kerry and his loonies, that if we just sit here at home and wait we’re going to catch them after they have already gotten into our country.

We don’t even have a handle on illegal immigrants crossing our borders on foot! Let alone a terrorist or group of terrorists that want to come into this nation that way. We are a huge country folks and it’s easy to hide once your inside.

No our current president has the right idea,

Chase them down, wherever they are at over there, and wipe them out!
And hold the harboring nations accountable for their actions!
_________________
Proud to be an American! and member of the PAJAMAHADEEN
FedEx Kinko's: When it absolutely, positively has to be forged overnight

[Otis]

I agree with shawa. If there's another attack people won't look to the strong leadership of Kerry. It's obvious to just about everyone that he is nothing but a bozo.
_________________
"It is not a smear, if you please, if you point out the record of your opponent."
-Murray Chotiner-

[rb325th]

The terrorist will strike in the Mid East against the U.S. as well as against our Allies (Australia) with upcoming elections. They see a clear weakness in Kerry (wether real or just his stupid comments) that tells them he will be the one to cut and run. They feel if they can inflict a lot of losses overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan it will bost Kerrys image of being correct in his assesment of Iraq, thus giving him a better chance of winning.
Kerry and others comments of Iraq being a fiasco, the War on Terror should be fought from a reactionary position instead of aggressive pre-emption is one Terrorist like, it gives them the upper hand.
An Attack here at home while not out of the question and quite possible would probably have an opposite effect. It would solidify Bushes stance that we must be more aggressive against Terror. To include the Patriot Act, Homeland Security etc..
Also the possibility that an attack here would be termed as a failure of those policies by the left as well. Nevermind that it is virtually impossible to completely seal our borders being the open soceity we are.
All in all it is a crappy situation and I for one do not trust Kerry to Lead or to be aggressive in the War on Terror. he has spent too much time minimizing the threat we face. As have a large number of the Power Players in the DNC.
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT

[Guest]

I think that the terrorist will not attack us because Bush is President, now God forbid, if Kerry were to be elected President, you can be sure they will try once again, because they know Kerry will not do a darn thing but flip and flop.

If we were attacked how do you think it would affect the election? I believe Bush would most definately win, but then I think he will win anyhow.