Friday, November 20, 2015

After Paris, What?


16 November 2015


            Following the attack in Paris, a strong consensus among TV experts on terrorism developed that the methods used were sophisticated and almost certainly involved planning and training by ISIS in the Middle East. That would seem to be true, but it's important to realize it needn't be. ISIS has encouraged just this type of operation as "home-grown" via the Internet. The nine terrorists could just as well have been a group acting independantly. It would not be difficult for them to get weapons. Instructions for making suicide explosive belts are readily available on the Internet. Simultaneity of attacks can be achieved with wristwatches. So-called "soft targets" are obvious choices.
            Consider the damage done by one or two individuals. David Hodarei of the U.K.'s Telegraph lists on the Internet 35 "most notable" U.S. shootings between April 1999 and August 2015, which resulted in the killing of 279 people. The killers, all home grown, acted either alone or with one other person.
            Imagine what a small group of dedicated jihadis could do in the U.S. Let's say a small group of perhaps two or three decide to show the reach of their cause by attacking not in New York or Washington, D.C., but in the farthest reaches of the U.S., in San Diego, California. They collect the necessary fully automatic weapons, handguns with silencers, and ammunition. They buy in small quantities over a period of time. Under no pressure from schedule restraints, they make suicide vests. For their target they select a movie theater. The Ken in Kensington is ideal: 575 seats in front of one screen. They wait until the theater is showing a film with a lot of gunfire and explosions. They attend one showing to learn when the sound is at its best.
            On the fateful evening, dressed in casual clothes, they walk into the theater, the automatic weapons held along their legs. They silence security with their handguns. Taking up pre-arranged positions at the back of the theater, the killers kneel and begin spraying rounds just over the top of the seats. It takes a while before viewers realize the sound of gunfire is not from the movie, but real. Screaming starts and people begin dropping to the floor. Seeing this, the shooters walk slowly down the aisles and start spraying bullets into those on the floor between the rows of seats.
            Alerted by cell phone calls from some of the patrons, the police arrive and take on the killers. The jihadis and perhaps some police are killed along with several hundred moviegoers. The terrorists have made their point: we have no place to hide.
            ISIS is bound to raise the stakes and come up with money to buy a suitcase atomic bomb from North Korea. We can delay that day by keeping ISIS away from the oil and the poppies. Eventually, a bomb may be smuggled into the U.S. If so, Washington D.C. might suffer the same fate as Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, Congress, the Supreme Court, the White House and all their inhabitants gone. It can't happen? Why not?
            What can we do to minimize the risk? We can do the obvious.
            Internally, we can set in motion a system whereby those who have become disengaged from society are detected and treated. Here, the first line of defense is the family, and we can urge people to get those individuals reported and treated. Second is the schools. All students should be scrutinized for any signs of social disengagement.
            From outside threats we can screen visitors and monitor them while they are here.
            We can attempt to counter ISIS Internet propaganda with our story. Finally, we can begin to try to convert the jihadists to our way of thinking. We remember "hearts and minds," but this time we need a far greater effort. This is both the most difficult and the most necessary work before us. It is, perhaps, the only answer.

_______________________________________________________
17 November 2015
            Late yesterday we learned ISIS has selected Washington D.C. as their next target. Their having already acquired an atomic weapon seems an extremely remote possibility, but they could easily mount an attack similar to the one in Paris. On the other hand, how many sticks of dynamite would it take to topple the Washington Monument?

No comments: