Thanks, Southack. That was a reasoned, superb rundown on the kind of tactical situation a civilian is likely to run into in this country. In the United States, suicide bombers are likely to be "spectaculars", conducted where a lot of people gather for a televised "event", such as a Super Bowl or New Year's Eve in Time's Square. There simply isn't the number of willing shahid to fill the ranks of the suicide bombers that exist in Israel and Palestine. There are literally hundreds of thousands of disgruntled young men living cheek by jowl with the Jews. Add to that population the mix of readily available armaments and explosive, a friendly governmental authority (Arafat and his gang), and an established network of Israeli Arabs who are sympathetic to the cause, and you can see why Israel has the problems it does.
I am not saying we are less vulnerable. I am saying a suicide bombing campaign, as opposed to a single event, would have logistical and operational security problems that would mitigate against a campaign's success. Single events that kill lots of people would make bigger news and increase the stature of, and the cash flow to, Al Qaeda in the Arab world. Saddam's "humiliation" almost begs for some sort of retaliation by Robert Fisk's friends.
I have also considered that the jihadi may try infantry style assaults on high-value targets (such as Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas or, say, the New York Stock Exchange). Finally, there is the "Stinger" threat that seems to be all the rage right about now.
Personally, I think AQ wants to do new attacks here because of the prestige value of attacks in the terrorist community. My entire reason for starting this thread anticpates that at some time in the futue, AQ will want to make itself felt here in America. I remain convinced that in the end, if all else fails to stop them, our ace in the hole is the armed citizen.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
