Why hasn't Al Qaeda struck the US again? (PV)

[Frenchy]

Originally Posted by justgotback

JD you are absolutley correct. As I work for one of the agencies you mention, I assure you it has been a direct reflection of the work the FBI, CIA, and DIA has done that has prevented another attack. I can tell you from experience they are trying to attack us, but we have the right folks doing great things preventing all that they can. Is it perfect protection? No. But we are giving it a heck of a run!

I agree with this.
We can be correct a 100 times, but they have only to be correct once!

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

2 points here. First, I wouldn't consider Obama a virus implanted by radical Muslims. A socialist, yes.

Hardly a socialist. In my opinion, he's a standard variety corporate Democrat.

Originally Posted by jdavionic

Second point - I really don't think AQ cares about our political system, who's winning or losing the election. I just don't think they care. It has no affect on their plan to spread their ideology across the world. They hate our way of life and they want us dead...Republican, Democrat, and Independent.

Al Qaeda may hate what they view as lack of morals in the U.S., but I don't think they want to kill average Americans because of it. I think they want to make a point and shame American leadership.

[ArmyGuy45]

they are just as broke as we are

[scjbash]

I agree with the patience aspect of it. As a whole we Americans have came to expect fast, if not instant results. It's a product of our technology and environment. But other people in this world remember what it's like to wait on something to be finished, especially a large undertaking, and even more so when they dedicate their lives to it. For them, so what if it takes 10 or 20 more years to hit us hard again, they have all the time in the world. It's not like they have liberal terrorists demanding a timeframe for withdrawal.

[CrAz3D]

They're waiting for something BIG. Killing 3,000 isn't much compared to what they could've done ... they're attack was symbolic.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

Al Qaeda may hate what they view as lack of morals in the U.S., but I don't think they want to kill average Americans because of it. I think they want to make a point and shame American leadership.

I'm not sure if that's the case. I think nothing would make them happier than to kill as many average U.S. citizens as possible. It may be in the name of making their point and shaming America's but I'm sure the more collateral damage they could cause the better they would have felt they had done for their cause.

I remember about 3-4 years ago the reports that were analyzing Bin Laden's video statements. At that time it was asserted that since he had warned the "Infidels" three times that we had to change our ways that he was given clearance to kill up to 30 million innocent citizens. I wish I had the link but do not.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

they are just as broke as we are

[Ishpeck]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

Just curious what your take is on this one. We have not been attacked by AQ since 9/11. Why not?

1) The effectiveness of any security solution is hypothetical until someone actually breaks it.

2) Fear is more effective at controlling people than actual body counts. If you kill enough people, you risk turning them into pragmatic survivalists instead of paranoid rich snobs (which is what we are now).

3) We aren't the only country the AQ hates. There aren't enough terrorists to go around and their own practices make themselves even scarcer.

[KEVWYO]

Originally Posted by XD 9 Loaded Sub-Compact

While you are right about them wanting all americans dead regaurdless of race, religon or political affiliation. I do think you are wrong about them not carring about our political climate. They are watching and waiting. They know it'll be a cake ride once a democrate gets in office.

How do you explain this logic () when a Republican was in office when 9/11 ocurred? I'm sorry but this is the biggest bunch of bovine scat! It's so stupid it's laughable.

Originally Posted by XD 9 Loaded Sub-Compact

It was before, Clinton had Bin laden and let him go. They know that if a democrate is in office all the have to do is wait till the US pulls out. Of course there will still be attacks on the troops all the way untill they are gone completly as they are not a disiplined military like ours there will always be radicals within the radicals that will keep coming. But after the dems pull the troops out of there then they can regroup (as you said we're keeping them busy over there) and then they can slip in under a not so watchfull eye because I'm sure there will be some social govt. program that AQ can apply for to help them aid thier organizations.

How is it that people can be so flippin cynical about a Democrat getting in the White House and "just knowing" that once that happens the US will get attacked again "for sure"!!!!??? Where is you cynicism regarding our current administration???? Surely you can't think this current administration is faultless in it's handling of a fair number of issues (energy policy, immigration, the border, federal attorney firings, Carl Rove's shenanigans, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc .... ) can you?

Seems that radical Muslims be it Hezbollah or al Qaeda have attacked us irregardless of which political party has been in charge.

This whole "the sky is falling if a Demo gets in the White House" is just fear mongering at it's worst. Do you really think that just because a person is a Dermocrat that terrorists will get a free pass???? Seriously????

It really bothers me that another American would intentionally accuse another American of letting an attack occur. There was even some speculation (perhaps just stupid conspiracy theory) that Bush new an attack was coming. I am no fan of Bush and I am counting the days until he's out but I've always thought that this accusatory mudslinging should be the stuff of grade school play grounds.

I will vote democratic if for no better reason than to say NO in my own small way to this baseless fear mongering just because someone else isn't a Republican. By the way, I've noted that Hillary has used this tactic a bit lately and because of that and her condescending tone I would vote for the homless drunk I pass everyday on my way to work than vote for her.

[Delija]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

I agree with this.
We can be correct a 100 times, but they have only to be correct once!

That's true. But it's also true that Al Qaeda has far less than one one-hundredth of our resources.

And as has been mentioned, since 9/11, our federal law enforcement agencies are more cooperative with one another. (IIRC, the FBI did not notify the CIA about instances of pilot training involving not only requests for lessons just to fly and not to land or take off, but trainees who were on lists of possible security risks).

Another factor is that the ease in which funds were transferred has been pretty much eliminated. Add to that the fact that vast sums of suspected terror sponsor's funds were immediately frozen. This was achieved with international cooperation after the attacks of 9.11, and was achieved quickly. The "off the grid" system of passing of funds was also broken up mostly by intelligence agencies having infiltrated the system. That turned out to be rather easy since they were able for the most part to just buy the information (from what I have been led to believe).

Electronic surveillance has been stepped up, and is more sophisticated every day. While it is probably true that the terrorists also advance their technology at an accelerated rate as well, they have to be more concerned which ultimately means less active. And trying to stay current with an organization like the NSA is virtually impossible - the combination of know-how and funding just isn't in the realm of reality - probably not for any other country, much less an underground terrorist organization.

Electronic and human surveillance has resulted in a fairly constant uncovering of terrorist 'cells" world wide.....mostly in western Europe but in Southeast Asia as well. The attacks in Spain and Bali made all the efforts a global task. Results: threats preempted, attacks preempted. The intelligence gathering works.

While suicide bombers may be virtually unstoppable in places like Iraq, and to a lesser degree in Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza, it is far less likely those who are duped into blowing themselves up are going to be able to enter the US (or Great Britain, Germany, Holland, etc.)....As we now know, they are apparently using people with Down's Syndrome or other maladies that make them unaware of what they are being used for. The teenagers who were willing to blow themselves up in exchange for money for their families.....that seemed to be more of a Palestinian phenomena, and the Palestinians have little or nothing in common with the anti-American agenda of Al Qaeda...they have their own war. And according to what we've been told, much of that money came from Saddam who is gone (along with his alleged funding of the Palestinian suicide bombers).

Never has an active terrorist organizer used himself as a suicide bomber. They send others to be "martyrs", they don't do the 'dirty work' themselves - with the exception of the 9.11 hijackers and even among the 19, we don't know how many really knew the planned outcome.

But no matter what the combination of factors is, and obviously there are a lot of them, I believe the bottom line is that they are mostly just cowards. And not stupid. They woke up a "sleeping giant' on 9.11, and lost their one true terrorist state almost immediately....the Taliban's Afghanistan. Their beliefs that America is "soft' and runs from attacks (as they seemed to have inferred by our pulling out of Lebanon after the Marine barracks bombing, our Navy essentially keeping out of risky ports after the Cole attack, etc.) has been disproved by our almost immediate retaliation after 9.11 in attacking Afghanistan and hunting down and killing the leaders. No one was even given an opportunity to sue for peace, no one asked for surrender....we went in and eliminated the bad guys. Very likely a far cry from what they expected.

It is just so many things. Our strategies and our tactics have changed militarily (my son joined the Navy after 9.11 and he's told me how vastly different procedures have become compared to pre-9.11 times - things he's only heard about because the changes were implemented well before he joined in 2003).

While I admit much of what I have said is speculation....personal opinion, guessing, perhaps some based on propaganda, there is one thing I can feel absolutely sure about......it is utterly ridiculous to believe that Al Qaeda takes into account whether a Democrat or a Republican is in he oval office....as 'KEVWYO" said..."stupid and laughable'.

Peace,
D.