Author of the article makes some good observations. Go with last plan or assimilate until secure comms can be re-established.
I agree. Have to think about the psychological makeup and training of the "trigger pullers" in such a case. If they're pros with a high amount of training, will they think independently and out of the box? Will they assess the risk factor and have enough intuition to proceed to another target or stand down to insure success another day? Folks with training in infiltration can recede into the background, fade away and strike at another target, later.
Fanatics don't need a lot of wasted training in "trade craft." They can be trusted to execute a suicide operation on time and within the parameters rehearsed in the plan. But they won't be able to function for long periods of time in an American cultural landscape, which they both hate and fear for the freedoms it gives to women. They'll know this and be more likely to just go ahead and pull the trigger anyway on the last named and planned target. There is a distinct danger to us in this mindset. If we fail to think like the fanatic, we may assume there is too much risk to the terrorists and subconsciously drop our guard, just enough for a suicide operation to succeed.
It's not enough to catch them in the act, because even putting a bullet into the forehead of somebody whose thumb is on the trigger of a nuclear or ANFO device equipped with a "dead man switch" won't stop them because the event still occurs. Was that too convoluted a sentence? Do you see what I'm getting at, here?