Replies

My opinion? Well, I think it is because while it is not difficult or expensive to mount an attack it is still an investment. Let me explain - it cost Al Qaeda approximately 100, 000 to 300, 000 to accomplish 911 depending on which source you use. The training, travel, logistics. However, the cost to the US (including the wars) is well over a Trillion dollars. That is a PERFECT exchange ratio for a terrorist ....however 300, 000 is still money. Thus, they tend to look for SOFT targets that have IMPACT. That is not as simple as it sounds, particularly considering limited capital. In many ways terrorism is like securities investment ....I want a value investment that has strong return overhang. Not that easy, even when investments abound at cheap prices.

Additionally, the US (and allied) anti terrorism forces have a lot of victories. It is just that their victories are never released to the public, while their failures are always very public (kind of sucks right). They have stopped a number of attacks. For instance the Russians stopped a new years attack in Moscow two years back, where Chechens had planned to detonate bombs using cellphones, by basically saturating the general area with radiowaves and causing the bomb to detonate prematurely (killing the jihadi).

A real example is that it took ten years before the first WTC attack and 911. Same reasons I believe. Ensuring they can get maximum impact but with the most enhanced chance of success. Assymetric warfare dictates that, tobe susuccessful against a powerful adversary, patience is necessary.

You know what could easily happen? At low cost, low risk, and high impact? Chechen style attacks in the US. Imagine a Beslan attack. Ridiculously easy to pull off, high success rate, and tremendous impact. Imagine 3 teams of 3 people each pulling it off in 3 locations around the country? What about car bombs at traffic jams around the country? If the Beltway Sniper (that guy who was shooting people out of the trunk of his car) caused that much chaos, what about random car bombs in traffic in different cities? What about random hijacks of school buses by lone jihadis with kalashnikovs? Or grenade attacks on buses and subways? An explosive backpack at movie theaters? A jihadi team of 3 with kalashnikovswalking into a hospital? A hotel's convention center?

In essence, attacks on normal life.

Think about the Moscow theater. Many on FR stupidly said the Russians were silly pumping binary nerve gas, since it also killed some innocents. However American spec ops said that there was no better option, since the Jihadis had strapped explosives and the doors, and the only option was to put everyone to sleep as quickly as possible since the choice was 30% dying or 100% dying.

Anyways ....