Posted on 10/12/2004 10:27:19 PM PDT by Wallaby
Jason Fuchs reports in Tuesday's Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily that "spectacular" attacks against targets in the West and particularly the United States, prior to the U.S. elections on November 2, are the subject of "intense strategic discussions" involving Islamist-jihadist groups along with their chief state sponsors, Iran and Syria. GIS sources report that, on the question of a major Islamist offensive, "[Government officials in] Damascus and Tehran, and Islamist leaders in Islamabad are engaged in the debate and having "major input."
|
"Damascus and Tehran, and [Islamist leaders in] Islamabad are in on the debate and are having major input." |
Though the debate is formulated in theological language, the GIS sources describe it as "extremely pragmatic." The utilitarian calculation involves an estimation of the probable reaction of the US electorate to pre-election attacks, described as a new mass-casualty "spectacular," and the danger of retaliation directed toward the sponsoring states. There is also some discussion of how the Muslim world will respond to the extreme violence and bloodshed being proposed.
If so, expect to see prophecy fulfilled:
http://bible.cc/isaiah/17-1.htm
BRING IT ON!
Is anyone else terrified, that Dufus who thinks terrorism is a nuisance, could be Commander in Chief?
I hope they are prepared for 90% of the middle east to disappear in a white haze.
If this is true, do we have to wait to respond in order to give them the first shot?
That is indeed a chilling prophecy. Take a look at verse 9.
> The utilitarian calculation involves an estimation
> of the probable reaction of the US electorate to
> pre-election attacks ...
Do we suppose that there are any "undecided" voters
who fail to grasp what this means?
Anyhow, this doesn't match what I'd expect to see on
the topic of imminent specific attacks, as it sounds
like planning-stage activity.
The major Al-Q attacks to date have been planned long
in advance. If they are just now planning, a pre-election
attack is not likely.
These folks are not competent at improvised attacks more
sophisticated than road-side bombs, and car-bombs, many
of which don't fully achieve their objectives.
Of course, there could be long-standing unreported plans,
and the debate is over whether to execute them or not.
That is a factor that is reportedly being discussed.
Because if they don't, we'll smash them, and they'll stay smashed.
Pass a global test?
Why presume that the preliminary stages of planning necessary for operations have not already been accomplished?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.