• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2nd successful terrorist attack during Obama's term

Thunder said:
The most important goal of terrorism...is to create fear, panic, and intimidation.

Therefore, these 2 attacks were successful.
Click to expand...

Some people are afraid of bees.. they fear them and are intimidated by them. Are bees terrorists?
 
Thunder said:
The most important goal of terrorism...is to create fear, panic, and intimidation.

Therefore, these 2 attacks were successful.
Click to expand...

Scare one person and effect no one else and you are correct. Scare one person and cause another to think they are pathetic and you have a wash.

The net effect is what will determine success or failure. The results are not in yet. for this incompetent bomber. Success is a matter of degree. If you try to make it a binary situation of fail/success, you will not get a useful picture of what is happening.
 
The Times Square attack kinda made me laugh.
Click to expand...
:confused::mad::(
Click to expand...
In hindsight, there is something amusing, about a random idiot filling his car with fireworks and combustibles for then to drive it to a crowded place, somehow being ignorant and stupid enough to imagine a huge fireball -- for then to not even be able to light the stuff on fire. It's something you expect from some sort of parody action flick like Hot Shots 2 or whatever that film was called.

If I were to do something like this, I would at the very least have done some cursory research on the materials I was using.
 
Last edited:
barrymore said:
And I think most large, organized terrorist groups realize that. Compared to hijacking airplanes, putting together a car-bomb seems remarkably easy. It's a wonder that it has not already happened. My best guess is that it is just not worth the time of a multi-national terrorist group who wants to make a big statement.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Can you imagine the chaos of having say a car bomb go off every day for a week or two in a random major city throughout the US? It would look like The Siege in every metropolitan city in the US.

It would seem quite easy for a homegrown terrorist to make car bombs or bring a bomb onto a subway but the sticking point is usually the actual detonator and that seems to be the hardest to make. Now manual detonation would be simpler but we just haven't seen fanatics in the US willing to die with their bomb. But that is only "yet". If we get some honest to goodness home grown martyrs then we will likely see some successful attacks with casualties.
 
Doubt said:
Scare one person and effect no one else and you are correct. Scare one person and cause another to think they are pathetic and you have a wash.

The net effect is what will determine success or failure. The results are not in yet. for this incompetent bomber. Success is a matter of degree. If you try to make it a binary situation of fail/success, you will not get a useful picture of what is happening.
Click to expand...

It is binary in the sense that there is almost a minimum threshold to be crossed for something to be called a success. But you are right, once this is crossed, there are degrees of success.

I just do not see how this attempt is a success. If taking 30 minutes out of someone's day to watch CNN is making them fearful, then that's a low threshold for success.
 
barrymore said:
I just do not see how this attempt is a success. If taking 30 minutes out of someone's day to watch CNN is making them fearful, then that's a low threshold for success.
Click to expand...

I agree..

The problem with terrorism is there is no measurement of success for either the terrorist or the terror"ee". IE, how do you know when you have defeated terrorism? How do you quantify what is terror vs what is a crime vs what is just downright insane?
 
MRC_Hans said:
How will you, in a free society, keep somebody to purchase a bunch of wisely available stuff (fertilizer, propane tanks, fireworks, alarm clocks, batteries) and rig a bomb?
Click to expand...

You aren't even bothering to listen to what I'm actually saying. :rolleyes:
 
Concerning success, how would you rate a bomber that sees he's going to get found out at an x-ray station and ignites his bomb then? Was he a success?

Bruce Schneier, the security expert, sees two areas in which terrorism of th9s sort can be thwarted: in intelligence operations, and in rescue operations. The rest, the TSA machinery, security cameras everywhere and no-fly databases are simply security theatre. They don't do much to actually increase security, though the c ameras do prove useful after the fact in apprehending the guilty. In any society, security theatre is always at odds with freedom, while intelligence work, while potentially a loss of freedom is nearly silent, and rescue work can even be inspiring to citizens. Is it a successful raid if five terrorists give up their lives and only three others are killed in a bomb attack, because of the excellence of the rescue work? This, after all, a war, I'm told.
 
shadron said:
Concerning success, how would you rate a bomber that sees he's going to get found out at an x-ray station and ignites his bomb then? Was he a success?

Bruce Schneier, the security expert, sees two areas in which terrorism of th9s sort can be thwarted: in intelligence operations, and in rescue operations. The rest, the TSA machinery, security cameras everywhere and no-fly databases are simply security theatre. They don't do much to actually increase security, though the c ameras do prove useful after the fact in apprehending the guilty. In any society, security theatre is always at odds with freedom, while intelligence work, while potentially a loss of freedom is nearly silent, and rescue work can even be inspiring to citizens. Is it a successful raid if five terrorists give up their lives and only three others are killed in a bomb attack, because of the excellence of the rescue work? This, after all, a war, I'm told.
Click to expand...

It's not theatre--it's just not as effective as most people think it is, or the government makes it out to be. If you take it for what it is (necessary, but not sufficient), then it is not a problem.
 
The failed bombing did not cause panic and fear. Times Square is right back to business as usual, not even 24 hours after the failure.
 
Thunder said:
that's right. I consider this to be the 2nd successful attack during the Obama administration.

why 2nd? first there was the Underwear bomber..who got on the plane and was able to try to ignite his bomb. our intelligence services failed to prevent him from being in the country and getting on that plane. so as far as I am concerned, he succeeded.

second, is the Times Square bomber. once again, he was able to be in the country, by a car, put together a crude bomb, and try to blow it up.

we did not stop him at all. both times, in fact, only luck saved us..not the hard work of anyone.

are we gonna be soo lucky a 3rd time????

will the third attempt fizzle away like the first two? I doubt it. after these two events, if there is a third event that DOES kill or injure people, Obama will be blamed.
Click to expand...

Let's see,
Terrorist kills on U.S. soil during Obama administration = ZERO
Terrorist kills on U.S. soil during Bush administration = 2,973+

So, yeah your point is totally *sarcasm* valid - we're so unsafe with Obama :rolleyes:
 
Such a fruitless discussion to determine who is "better" at stopping terrorism. You need to know 2 details that we do not know--both of which are more important than knowing what ends up on the front of the newspaper.

You need to know:
1.) the difference in terrorist group funding, planning, organization, and desire to carry out a terrorist plot
2.) the number of plots prevented by each administration, and potential impact of those plots had they succeeded
 
BeAChooser said:
Well, there again, it was more terrorist incompetence, not the government that kept that from happening. And that's correctable by the other side.
Click to expand...

This is a total misconception of what happened in both Times Square and the underwear bomber case.

1. The underwear bomber was thwarted by a simple x-ray machine that prevented a real detonator from getting on board. No detonator = no bomb. This was pre-9/11 screening for the win!

2. The Times Square bomber was limited by the fact that his purchase of any real bomb ingredients could have tipped his hand. Same with researching proper construction methods. Do a bit of browsing on bomb making sites and then go try to buy the fertilizer and detonators necessary for an effective device. Do you really think you will be free to enter Times Square? Our monitoring, or his reasonable fear of our monitoring, limited his ability to do the job competently, not luck.

To dismiss the restrictions in place that lead to these failures is just as dismissive of reality as claiming that we are ever going to be 100% safe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom