[infarrelisam]

Just how competent are the terrorists? The NY Times Square bomber was caught in 48 hours because he among other dumb things used a vehicle he purchased under his own name and a plane ticket also under his own name.

The shoe bomber last Christmas was also very incompetent and was unsuccessful.

In Afghanistan while we are seeing some more complex attacks with coordinated elements acting in unison, we still generally see the bad guys doing some real dumb things. The most common is that they brag about attacks before they happen which results in many intelligence successes in preventing attacks.

The 9/11 attackers were more sophisticated than the average terrorist now but the main reason they were as successful in conducting their operations is that many different security and intelligence were not on the alert or as vigilant as they should or could have been. Something as simple as the current tighter screening would have prevented the attacks by keeping the box cutters off the flights. While they could have gotten the weapons through security by other means, they would have opened their operation to a wider number of participants thus increasing the potential for breaching operational security and being exposed beforehand.

I’m not taking anything away from the intelligence community in their efforts as I have seen firsthand some of their unsung successes. I’m just pointing out that the average terrorist has the operational competence of a grade school gang of bullies.

[Cofeeman]

Considering that many terrorist organizations recruit poor, uneducated men/women I don't think we should be to surprised.

Also, their short shelf life doesn't really allow many to gain real, hands on experience.

[JohnVK]

Considering that many terrorist organizations recruit poor, uneducated men/women I don't think we should be to surprised.

Also, their short shelf life doesn't really allow many to gain real, hands on experience.

Bingo, we kill them in Iraq and Afganistan befor ethey can get full training. they are on the run and have no real safe haven to plan attacks.. (Thanks to Bush, btw)

In essence we are fighting them there so they cant attack here.

[LoveTTatall]

I think part of the reason that they aren't successful is that the planning and coordination of a successful terrorist attack is harder to keep a secret. The Times Square attack was successful right up until the bomb was a failure. But if the people (remains to be seen who it was I guess) had made the effort or had the expertise to make a real bomb, then maybe they would have been caught in the planning stages?

[acissombiapse]

I think that you need to consider that a terror attack need not result in loss of life to be "successful". Richard Reid failed to bring down a plane but he did manage to change the way that security was handled internationally. It is the intent of terrorism to provoke a response and sow seeds of distrust. In this the terrorists have been eminently successful.

[Toninvell]

I think that you need to consider that a terror attack need not result in loss of life to be "successful". Richard Reid failed to bring down a plane but he did manage to change the way that security was handled internationally. It is the intent of terrorism to provoke a response and sow seeds of distrust. In this the terrorists have been eminently successful.

My neice works close to times square, and she was actually worried about going to work today.. so it worked.

[Andrius]

I think that you need to consider that a terror attack need not result in loss of life to be "successful". Richard Reid failed to bring down a plane but he did manage to change the way that security was handled internationally. It is the intent of terrorism to provoke a response and sow seeds of distrust. In this the terrorists have been eminently successful.

Good point. You can't cause terror in dead people.

[Lt_Apple]

The 9/11 attackers were more sophisticated than the average terrorist now but the main reason they were as successful in conducting their operations is that many different security and intelligence were not on the alert or as vigilant as they should or could have been.

I disagree. The main reason they were successful was because they came up with an excellent operational plan, took their time and executed it well (not perfectly, but well).

[Trikaduliana]

Well...when you are recruiting people to kill other people, and likely yourself along with them...you won't exactly attract competent people.

[arrasleds]

Greetings and Felicitations,

I think you need to consider the fact that the particular brand of Islamic Fundamentalism that breeds these kinds of people are very much of an anti-intellectual mindset.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

[amotoustict]

Count your blessings... one by one...

[NeroASERCH]

Bingo, we kill them in Iraq and Afganistan befor ethey can get full training. they are on the run and have no real safe haven to plan attacks.. (Thanks to Bush, btw)

In essence we are fighting them there so they cant attack here.

First of all, there are limited ways in which you can really train in a manner that would guarantee attracting attention for some of these attacks. Suicide attacks (such as 9/11) really cannot be practiced in real situations since they end in death. Thus, the first time they are done is the last time they are done. It's not like we had that many terror attacks in the US and that they simply shifted to Iraq (fight them over there and all that bullshit). No, the invasion actually led to more attacks over there, not necessarily less here.

Secondly, your "no real safe haven" argument is unfounded. There is no way for the US to patrol all of the mountains, caves and other areas in either Iraq or Afghanistan (are those even the only places to hide?). In addition, the terror attacks that we have seen here require little or no traditional combat training in the sense of firearm use (they use bombs or improvise and turn planes into weapons).

[lagunaEl]

Considering that many terrorist organizations recruit poor, uneducated men/women I don't think we should be to surprised.

Also, their short shelf life doesn't really allow many to gain real, hands on experience.

It's a misconception that jihadists are poor/uneducated.

Bin Ladin and his henchmen are among the wealthiest and best-educated.
The NY bomber is, too, from an elite family in Pakistan.

Jihad is religiously-based, not socio-economically based.

[S.T.D.]

First of all, there are limited ways in which you can really train in a manner that would guarantee attracting attention for some of these attacks. Suicide attacks (such as 9/11) really cannot be practiced in real situations since they end in death. Thus, the first time they are done is the last time they are done. It's not like we had that many terror attacks in the US and that they simply shifted to Iraq (fight them over there and all that bullshit). No, the invasion actually led to more attacks over there, not necessarily less here.

Secondly, your "no real safe haven" argument is unfounded. There is no way for the US to patrol all of the mountains, caves and other areas in either Iraq or Afghanistan (are those even the only places to hide?). In addition, the terror attacks that we have seen here require little or no traditional combat training in the sense of firearm use (they use bombs or improvise and turn planes into weapons).

The other thing we have been doing lately is treating this as a police matter, not a military matter. We have stopped thinking that we need to attack a country to solve the problem and begun realizing we are dealing with perps, not with nation-states. It is a whole different outlook and a whole different set of expectations.

[vosteglog]

The other thing we have been doing lately is treating this as a police matter, not a military matter. We have stopped thinking that we need to attack a country to solve the problem and begun realizing we are dealing with perps, not with nation-states. It is a whole different outlook and a whole different set of expectations.

And as a result they have been allowed to build up and train in ungoverned regions of the Earth unmolested.

[molaunterbizone]

I disagree. The main reason they were successful was because they came up with an excellent operational plan, took their time and executed it well (not perfectly, but well).

Agree. We we were blindsided. And if they had made the minor adjustment of targeting the Capital when Congress was in session instead of the WTC, our world would be a little different place right now.

Timing is everything. It could have been a lot worse....


.

[varrozans]

And as a result they have been allowed to build up and train in ungoverned regions of the Earth unmolested.

If the goal is to protect America from foreign (international) terrorists, then they would need to secure every part of every other nation on the planet. Half-measures like Iraq and Afghanistan are not going to do shit except piss people off and get more of them to blow up and we can't even secure Iraq and Afghanistan so our attempts are just going to hurt us.

[Teeppoodiug]

If the goal is to protect America from foreign (international) terrorists, then they would need to secure every part of every other nation on the planet. Half-measures like Iraq and Afghanistan are not going to do shit except piss people off and get more of them to blow up and we can't even secure Iraq and Afghanistan so our attempts are just going to hurt us.

Turn the situation around just a bit. Bank robbers, muggers, rapists, embezzlers, pirates, and kidnappers have the same training issues. There is not a country in the World that would attack another nation to catch those kinds of bad guys; we use police work and police methods to catch those perps and it works!

Why wouldn't we use the same techniques to catch terrorists, who are, after all, just another bunch of bad guys?

[bahrain41]

Turn the situation around just a bit. Bank robbers, muggers, rapists, embezzlers, pirates, and kidnappers have the same training issues. There is not a country in the World that would attack another nation to catch those kinds of bad guys; we use police work and police methods to catch those perps and it works!

Why wouldn't we use the same techniques to catch terrorists, who are, after all, just another bunch of bad guys?

They would. Not particularly well, but they would be more efficient than a military action.

[pMJWFoAWD]

The would. Not particularly well, but they would be more efficient than a military action.

Batting 100% so far.