| « | Ginny Brown-Waite For President! |
»
|
|
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Matching The Defense To The Threat
Military planners are as reluctant as anyone else to ponder an unpleasant possibility. The most unpleasant of all possibilities, when one contemplates the possible outbreak of hostilities, is being forced onto the defensive. Consequently, classical war plans have always focused on the offensive moves the planners intended to make when the red balloon finally went up -- even those plans made by nations with little or no offensive capability.
There have been exceptions, of course; the French Maginot Line and the associated defensive posture of France's forces prior to World War II come to mind at once. But the overwhelming majority of war plans emphasize offensive moves, including many moves never even attempted. Even in nations where the military is under civilian control, this overemphasis of the offense is seldom criticized or corrected. There's a lot of pride at stake, and civilian rulers are as reluctant to explain to their people why the Beloved Fatherland can't trample any and all enemies out of sheer elan as the generals are to think about being forced to play defense.
Nevertheless, at any given time in any given war, one side is attacking and the other side is defending; to that law of symmetry there are no exceptions. In that light, regard this recent report of movement among our sworn enemies:
Intelligence agencies have been warned that al Qaeda may be planning to attack air and rail travel in Europe in actions that may occur during the busy holiday travel season, CBS News has learned exclusively.In separate interviews with Arab and other intelligence sources, CBS News has been told that the warnings come from interrogations of al Qaeda suspects who recently left Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"One suspect said plans for repeating the Heathrow attempt (a reference to the failed 'liquid bomb' plot interrupted in August) were all prepared. It is now a matter of taking action," said one Arab official who asked not to be named because he is not authorized to speak to the media. "Al Qaeda's strategy appears to be raising the pressure in Europe."
In a move that has been puzzling intelligence agencies, al Qaeda has been withdrawing well-trained Arab fighters from the mountains and battlefields of Afghanistan.
In detailed interviews with Arab diplomats, intelligence sources and Pakistani and western officials, Arab members have been leaving Afghanistan for the past six months while handing over its militant activities in Afghanistan to that country's resurgent Taliban movement.
The new information helps to shed fresh light on a key mystery at the heart of al Qaeda's decision, first reported by CBS News in September, to withdraw its Arab members, fighters and logisticians from Afghanistan.
Rohan Gunaratna, head of terrorism research at Singapore's Institute for Defense and Strategic Studies, and the author of "Inside Al Qaeda; Global Network of Terror," said "We have seen that several hundred, perhaps five to six hundred al Qaeda members who were located on the Afghan-Pakistan border, have now left."
Gunaratna adds that these al Qaeda members have returned "to their own home countries, particularly to Iraq, and also to other Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia and Yemen. We have seen a shift in Al Qaeda's thinking, in strategy." ...
Analysts point to statements in recent months issued by Ayman al Zawahiri, Al Qaeda's number two, calling for attacks on Middle East oil installations.
"What they want to do is to hit something that will affect the Americans very markedly, and they've determined that the oil production facilities, whether it's pipelines or refineries, are something that can really contribute to the war against the United States," Scheuer said.
The entire article deserves your attention, but your Curmudgeon didn't want to run afoul of the copyright laws.
Analyst Rohan Gunaratna states explicitly that he believes those al-Qaeda Arabs will be employed in their home countries. Your Curmudgeon's assessment is a bit different: those 'home countries,' the majority of which are nominally friendly toward Europe and the United States, will be used as transit points. Though the oil installations of the Arabian states are and will remain targets, al-Qaeda's ambitions have never stopped at raising the price of oil. Its spokesmen are openly ardent to shed Western blood:
Muslim extremists are plotting at least 30 major terrorist attacks in Britain and the threats may involve chemical and nuclear devices, the head of Britain's domestic spy agency said.Eliza Manningham-Buller, head of intelligence agency MI5, said young British Muslims were being groomed to become suicide bombers and her agents were tracking some 1,600 suspects, most of whom were British-born and linked to al Qaeda in Pakistan.
"We are aware of numerous plots to kill people and damage our economy. What do I mean by numerous? Five? Ten? No, nearer 30 ... that we know of," Manningham-Buller said in a speech to a specially invited audience in London on Thursday evening.
Her remarks were posted on the MI5 Web site on Friday.
"These plots often have links back to al Qaeda in Pakistan and through those links al Qaeda gives guidance and training to its largely British foot soldiers here," she added.
The threat was growing and affected other countries from "Spain to France to Canada and Germany," she said.
But of course, no target in Europe could equal the significance of a target in the United States:
DUBAI (AFP) - Al-Qaeda's Iraq chief threatened in an audio message posted on the Internet that the terror network will "blow up the White House.""We announce today the end of a phase of the jihad (holy war) and the start of a new one... to usher in the project of an Islamic caliphate and restore Islam's glory," Abu Hamza al-Muhajer said in the message.
"We swear we will not rest from our jihad... before blowing up the filthiest house, dubbed the White House," in the course of establishing the caliphate which began with the proclamation of an Islamic state in Iraq, he said....
"I thank the most stupid and worst president America -- the country of slaves and drugs -- has ever had for giving us this great historic opportunity," said the voice.
"The American people have taken the first step on the right path in order to get out of their impasse and have started to realize the treachery of their president and his subordination to Israel, voting for a measure of reason in the latest elections," Muhajer said.
"I tell (Bush): don't hurry to flee like your defense minister (Donald Rumsfeld, who resigned Wednesday). We have still not quenched our thirst for your blood."
Now, a threat to blow up the White House can more or less be ignored. If the attacker has a nuclear weapon, or command of a large, fully fueled airliner that's within three minutes' flight time of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, he might be able to pull it off, but otherwise, that particular address is safer than any other spot on the planet. But the obvious lust to kill Americans should trouble anyone who's aware of the unique vulnerabilities of our open society:
- The enemy is unpleasantly numerous;
- He's willing to die if he can take a few of us with him;
- He doesn't wear a uniform;
- He's able to gain ingress to our country with relative ease;
- Many of his ethnic and religious brethren are already within our borders, making it easy for him to conceal himself among them;
- Our laws, our Constitution, and above all our cultural openness to persons from other lands give him the initiative.
Just as much as the other nations of the West, America is playing defense against the Islamic threat -- and despite our five years of success in thwarting any further mass attacks on our people or institutions, our defenses are not what they should be.
Your Curmudgeon remains of the opinion that only a rigid quarantine of the Islamic world can put a satisfactory end to the Long War. However, it will take some time (and a lot of attitude adjustment of the sort not normally accomplished with alcohol) to get there from here. Surviving the interval with little or no damage must therefore take priority.
But how does one defend against a diffuse threat of this sort, whose agents are unrecognizable until they shout "Allahu Akhbar!" and grope for the trigger on their explosive vests?
Clearly, no perfect defense is possible. However, we can take a large step toward a satisfactory defense by once again becoming a people in arms:
- Get your shooting skills polished up. If you've never shot before, now's the time to learn.
- Make sure your household is armed: at least one long gun for every member of your family over the age of thirteen. (Do they all know how to shoot? Why not?)
- Make sure your weapons are well maintained. A gun that goes unused for a long period should be suspected; even a gun that's gone unfired for as long as six months should be broken down and rigorously cleaned.
- Make sure your ammunition isn't stale. Most of us don't have the time, patience, or capital to load our own rounds; we buy the factory stuff, which for most purposes is more than adequate. But ammunition doesn't stay good forever. If you have a few old boxes -- i.e., more than a year old -- lying around, take them to your local gun shop and ask the proprietor whether you ought to trust them. If he says not, he'll dispose of them for you. If he says they're probably okay, get down to the range and use them up!
- If you live in an agreeable district, get a carry permit for a handgun. Then make a point of carrying at all possible times. An armed man has more options than an unarmed one -- and it's the intervention of an armed bystander that villains fear most, which is why the crime rate is so much higher in weaponless states than in those where citizens routinely pack heat.
- If your state or municipality places severe restrictions of any sort on private weaponry, join a group and agitate for their repeal. If there is no such group in your burg, start one!
A diffuse threat such as Islamic terrorism cannot be met with traditional military might. It can only be countered adequately by a diffuse defense. It's time that all Americans enlisted in that defense, just as if we were all front-line soldiers in the War on Terror...because we are.
Just ask the Israelis.
Comments
Francis, I agree that a quarantine of the Islamic World would be a satisfactory solution to the Long War. But I don’t think such a quarantine could be maintained even a few years before we elect some idiot who would drop it again. Then, too, we can’t trust all our allies to honor said quarantine, any more than they did the “box” we put Saddam in.
On the other hand, destroying all their cities and most of their people is something we can do in a year or two, and which no dunderhead President elected afterwards can undo.
So that’s what I think we ought to do. More, since the quarantine will be sporadic, it’s what I think we WILL do.
Posted by on 11/11/2006 at 07:05 PMYOu try any aspect of the quarantine and you will be up on charges of incorect thought.
In the UK the police will visit your home whn they will ignore simple assault. On a university campus, you will be tried and convicted of some type of hate crime or thought or speach. We are way beyond that -supporting that will lead to yopur personal destruction and the destruction of your family.
Posted by Doug_S on 11/11/2006 at 11:16 PM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
