PDA

View Full Version : Why al Qaeda Is Unlikely To Execute Another 9/11



Peter1469
05-02-2012, 09:07 PM
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110831-why-al-qaeda-unlikely-execute-another-911?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=official&utm_campaign=link

Because we have rendered them largely combat ineffective.

All threats have two basic components: intent and capability. Al Qaeda's leaders have threatened to conduct an attack more terrible than 9/11 for nearly a decade now, and the threats continue. Here's what Ayman al-Zawahiri, now al Qaeda's No. 1, said to his followers on Aug. 15, 2011, in a message released on the Internet via as-Sahab media:
"Seek to attack America that has killed the Imam of the Mujahideen and threw his corpse in the sea and then imprisoned his women and children. Seek to attack her so history can say that a criminal state had spread corruption on earth and Allah sent her his servants who made her a lesson for others and left her as a memory."
The stated intent of al Qaeda and the rest of the jihadist movement (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110503-dispatch-jihadist-groups-after-bin-ladens-death) is and has been to strike the United States as hard and as often as possible. It logically follows, then, that al Qaeda would strike the United States on Sept. 11 -- or any other day -- if possible. With intent thus established, now we need to focus on capability.
One of the primary considerations regarding al Qaeda's capability to strike the United States is the state of the jihadist movement itself. The efforts of the U.S. government and its allies against the core al Qaeda group, which is based in Pakistan, have left it badly damaged and have greatly curtailed its operational ability, especially its ability to conduct transnational attacks. In January we forecast that we believed the al Qaeda core was going to be marginalized (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/jihadism-2011-persistent-grassroots-threat) on the physical battlefield in 2011 and that it would also struggle to remain relevant on the ideological battlefield. Indeed, it has been our assessment for several years now that al Qaeda does not pose a strategic threat to the United States (http://www.stratfor.com/al_qaeda_and_strategic_threat_u_s_homeland).


Read more: Why al Qaeda Is Unlikely To Execute Another 9/11 | Stratfor (http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110831-why-al-qaeda-unlikely-execute-another-911#ixzz1tlgLj3cm)

MMC
05-02-2012, 09:15 PM
Think there is any others that could Pete?

Peter1469
05-02-2012, 09:24 PM
Think there is any others that could Pete?

Yes. There are franchise groups out there that have strategic reach. Just not the al Qaeda prime organization. The new thing is surgically implanting bombs into body cavities, such as the stomach. We will likely see how well that works soon enough.

MMC
05-02-2012, 09:30 PM
Did you here about some Anarchists trying to blow up Clevland and then they said something about Chicago and the NATO summit. Feds and L'E'S around here said there was no credibility to anything with Chicago.

Already they have seen the protestors start to gather. Plus they put the no fly zone for Private planes over Chicago.

I did hear about the planting of bombs inside one's body.

Peter1469
05-02-2012, 09:38 PM
Did you here about some Anarchists trying to blow up Clevland and then they said something about Chicago and the NATO summit. Feds and L'E'S around here said there was no credibility to anything with Chicago.

Already they have seen the protestors start to gather. Plus they put the no fly zone for Private planes over Chicago.

I did hear about the planting of bombs inside one's body.


Yes I saw that.

It is the new rage. There is a rouge Islamist bomb maker who has teamed up with a Dutch (Muslim) doctor. We can hope that the explosive will lose enough force going through the body to not be able to overly weaken the skin of the aircraft..... It sure would be wild to be on that flight!

wingrider
05-03-2012, 01:25 AM
Al Queda don't have to make another attack,, they have already succeeded in changing the face of America.. look at all the bullshit you have to go through to even get on a plane, all the spying done on american citizens by our own government, how about the NDAA, the NSA, the DHS, and the computer system in utah that files everthing you do, or say, or buy in a database.. nope .. Al Queda don't have to do another thing.. they already won.

MMC
05-03-2012, 07:01 AM
Yes I saw that.

It is the new rage. There is a rouge Islamist bomb maker who has teamed up with a Dutch (Muslim) doctor. We can hope that the explosive will lose enough force going through the body to not be able to overly weaken the skin of the aircraft..... It sure would be wild to be on that flight!


When I first came home from overseas.....I was still Jumping. Dabbled with some Skydiving. Do you still jump pete? Anytime I had to take a commercial flight I took my parachute with me. Never really worried about the human factor doing much of anything on a plane.

Who would you say the US needs to watch out for Pete. As terrorists. Maybe we could get a thread going with some of these Terrorist Groups up. Where they are and who they are. At the very least we can educate the lib-tards.

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 08:25 AM
Al Queda don't have to make another attack,, they have already succeeded in changing the face of America.. look at all the bullshit you have to go through to even get on a plane, all the spying done on american citizens by our own government, how about the NDAA, the NSA, the DHS, and the computer system in utah that files everthing you do, or say, or buy in a database.. nope .. Al Queda don't have to do another thing.. they already won.

I disagree and I imagine if we could poll the remaining al Qaeda members, they would also not agree. They have been obsessing over succeeding with other massive attacks and have failed.

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 08:26 AM
When I first came home from overseas.....I was still Jumping. Dabbled with some Skydiving. Do you still jump pete? Anytime I had to take a commercial flight I took my parachute with me. Never really worried about the human factor doing much of anything on a plane.

Who would you say the US needs to watch out for Pete. As terrorists. Maybe we could get a thread going with some of these Terrorist Groups up. Where they are and who they are. At the very least we can educate the lib-tards.

I haven't jumped since 1991.

MMC
05-03-2012, 09:45 AM
I haven't jumped since 1991.


Well it has been awhile for me too. :laugh: So who do you think we could throw up as real viable threats as terrorists that the US would be concerned about?

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 11:42 AM
The various al Qaeda affiliates in Africa and SW Asia. The ones in Yemen may be the worst now.

MMC
05-03-2012, 11:45 AM
The various al Qaeda affiliates in Africa and SW Asia. The ones in Yemen may be the worst now.

Do you think the Red brigade could be a viable threat?

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 11:47 AM
Outside of Italy? No.

gophangover
05-03-2012, 01:48 PM
Now they're saying Bin Laden wanted to kill Obama. It's a wonder the GOP didn't make him their nominee.

ramone
05-03-2012, 04:29 PM
The problem is going to be with these homegrown nut jobs. Not so much with the outside freaks, I'm quite sure there are also plants who have been here for years waiting for an opportunity to get their virgins.

Vilifier of Zombies
05-03-2012, 05:58 PM
Yes. There are franchise groups out there that have strategic reach. Just not the al Qaeda prime organization. The new thing is surgically implanting bombs into body cavities, such as the stomach. We will likely see how well that works soon enough.

Not all jihadist support al Qaeda - albeit al Qaeda's capabilities are limited to places like Egypt, Jordan, maybe even Spain but I don't think they're ready to gp back to Spain after what'd happened in 2004.

MMC
05-03-2012, 06:13 PM
Right.....and not all terrorists are Muslim. Nor have anything to do with Africa and the M.E.

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 06:26 PM
The problem is going to be with these homegrown nut jobs. Not so much with the outside freaks, I'm quite sure there are also plants who have been here for years waiting for an opportunity to get their virgins.

The lone wolves are the hardest to detect, for clear reasons. But they also tend to be untrained.

ramone
05-03-2012, 07:18 PM
The lone wolves are the hardest to detect, for clear reasons. But they also tend to be untrained.

Doesn't mean they can't be effective, all it takes is one smart one and a well thought out plan. In general where all criminals get caught is because the run their head to somebody. I hope you are right about the untrained aspect but the information is out there for a determined terrorist. I see this as a big threat to our republic.

MMC
05-03-2012, 07:29 PM
Question is will the US consider all Anarchists as terrorists?

Chris
05-03-2012, 07:32 PM
Found this interesting, and relevant--don't let title mislead...

Why al Qaeda May Never Die (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/why-al-qaeda-may-never-die/)
The first anniversary of the murderous raid on Osama bin Laden’s hideaway presents an opportunity to evaluate the threat al Qaeda now poses. For its part, the Obama administration/reelection campaign seems more interested in using the event to score political points against Mitt Romney. But terrorism alarmists are more focused on al Qaeda itself and are in peak form explaining that, although the organization has been weakened, it still manages to present a grave threat.

Various techniques, honed over a decade, are applied to support this contention. If they are accepted as valid, al Qaeda will cease to exist or be “defeated” only when we run entirely out of tiny groups or individual nuts operating with al Qaeda-like aspirations....

Much of the alarmist perspective has been generated in opposition to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s contention last year that “we’re within reach of strategically defeating al-Qaeda.” ...

To the administration’s claim that it is trying “to keep our country safe,” Associated Press intelligence writer Kimberly Dozier rhetorically observes, “How safe remains in question.”

But there is a perfectly valid method for assessing the question and for measuring the risk international terrorism presents to the United States. At current rates, an American’s chance of becoming a victim of terrorism in the United States is about 1 in 3.5 million per year....

These calculations are based, of course, on historical data. However, the terrorism data include not only 9/11, but also the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, and alarmists who would reject such history need to explain why they think terrorists will suddenly become vastly more competent in the future.

But no one seems to be making that argument. Indeed, notes Dozier, U.S. officials say al Qaeda has become less capable of a large attack like 9/11.

She also discloses that these officials made this brave disclosure only on condition of anonymity because they feared that “publicly identifying themselves could make them a target” of terrorists. Meanwhile, however, terrorism specialist Peter Bergen observed to Dozier in heroic full attribution mode that “The last terror attack (in the West) was seven years ago in London,” that there “haven’t been any major attacks in the U.S.,” and that “they are recruiting no-hopers and dead-enders.”

The problem is that there is an endless supply of no-hopers and dead-enders out there.

And also, it appears, of terrorism alarmists.

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 07:39 PM
Doesn't mean they can't be effective, all it takes is one smart one and a well thought out plan. In general where all criminals get caught is because the run their head to somebody. I hope you are right about the untrained aspect but the information is out there for a determined terrorist. I see this as a big threat to our republic.


Absolutely. Look at what MAJ Hasan accomplished. He trained himself; picked a simple attack scenario and carried it out. And the authorities should have picked up on all the clues that he left. But look at the dozens of other lone wolf (or very small cell) attempted attacks that the FBI foiled- largely do to interrupting the attack cycle via informants and sting operations.

Peter1469
05-03-2012, 07:40 PM
Found this interesting, and relevant--don't let title mislead...

Why al Qaeda May Never Die (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/why-al-qaeda-may-never-die/)


The problem is that there is an endless supply of no-hopers and dead-enders out there.

And the vast majority of these are inept. Which is good for us.

ramone
05-03-2012, 07:44 PM
Found this interesting, and relevant--don't let title mislead...


And also, it appears, of terrorism alarmists.

I find that statement disturbing on many levels.

Chris
05-03-2012, 08:01 PM
Seems to me now it's Obama and liberals become the alarmists (hypothetically) in order to politicize terrorism.


Interesting, terrorists politicize Islam, liberal politicize terrorism.

MMC
05-03-2012, 08:07 PM
Question is will the US consider all Anarchists as terrorists?

http://www.debatepolitics.com/images/smilies/New_Smilies/2bump.gif

Chris
05-03-2012, 08:48 PM
I consider myself an anarchocapitalist, we're peaceful. :)

MMC
05-03-2012, 09:01 PM
I consider myself an anarchocapitalist, we're peaceful. :)



http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e200/olovo/smilies/pillowfight.gif...........:laugh:..........:wink:

ramone
05-03-2012, 10:37 PM
Seems to me now it's Obama and liberals become the alarmists (hypothetically) in order to politicize terrorism.


Interesting, terrorists politicize Islam, liberal politicize terrorism.

Yes and Nationalist stay out of other peoples shit, same as libertarians. Protect our borders and let the rest kill themselves. It's just my thought, I'm not the world police or anything.

wingrider
05-03-2012, 11:27 PM
Yes and Nationalist stay out of other peoples shit, same as libertarians. Protect our borders and let the rest kill themselves. It's just my thought, I'm not the world police or anything.
yep I concur... protect ourselves, keep our treasure at home and take care of our own, seal the borders both north and south and quit pissing money off on people who hate us.. yeppers that is the right approach.

MMC
05-03-2012, 11:38 PM
Yeah, and quit bailing out the IMF and the ECB while their at it. :cussing:

ramone
05-04-2012, 03:56 PM
yep I concur... protect ourselves, keep our treasure at home and take care of our own, seal the borders both north and south and quit pissing money off on people who hate us.. yeppers that is the right approach.

That is true, why in the hell are we giving China money every year? Hell, we are indebted to them so deep we will never pay it back and yet we give them millions each year. I'd like somebody to explain that shit to me without some mumbo jumbo answer. To give money to people who hate us to use to kill us is another example you touched on. Might as well just give them some planes and guns. You know, like we did in Mexico.

Our country is run by imbeciles who haven't a grain of common sense, or an ounce of patriotic thinking.

Chris
05-04-2012, 05:41 PM
Our country is run by imbeciles who haven't a grain of common sense, or an ounce of patriotic thinking.

Name a better country. (I'm not trying to be patriotic.)

Conley
05-04-2012, 05:49 PM
Name a better country. (I'm not trying to be patriotic.)

Great question Chris and one that could spawn an entirely new thread. As most know I'm a logical guy and while I will call out our leadership all day long there's no place I'd rather be than the U.S. of A. As long as we have our freedom of speech there is always a chance to improve our nation.

ramone
05-04-2012, 06:22 PM
Name a better country. (I'm not trying to be patriotic.)

Mmm, don't ad hom me. Do you think our country is run by imbeciles and has been for years? I do, how about you?

Conley
05-04-2012, 06:32 PM
They're not imbeciles - they're of average intelligence with certain skills, in it for the money, and the system is working well for them, just not for we the people. If they were truly trying to serve the people then I would agree they appear to be idiots, but that's not their goal at all. Listen to the audiotapes of Senators and Congresspeople cold calling people for money and the puzzle pieces all fit.

ramone
05-04-2012, 06:42 PM
Chris, awaiting your answer...............Sorry CL, Chris and I go back aways and I expect Chris to answer his own counter posts. It's a simple question really.

Chris
05-04-2012, 06:44 PM
More like Conley puts it. Out country is run by people. Not very well. Think Obama, then think Bush, lol. Other countries are worse, imo. As Madison put it: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

There, as many have said, that government that governs least governs best.

Society does a damned sight better governing itself.



And patience is a virtue. :rollseyes:

Conley
05-04-2012, 06:50 PM
Chris, awaiting your answer...............Sorry CL, Chris and I go back aways and I expect Chris to answer his own counter posts. It's a simple question really.

I knew he would answer but felt like adding on since I thought Chris made a good point originally...figured you were putting it all out there for discussion but if you don't want me replying to your posts then just let me know and I won't have any problem with it. I know you guys go back to the Congress and FFA but didn't think that had anything to do with what I wrote. It's Friday going on evening and the only way things will turn south is if I run out of beer over on this end.

Chris
05-04-2012, 06:53 PM
Conley, please post! Hell, you even helped me answer. :-)

ramone
05-04-2012, 06:59 PM
More like Conley puts it. Out country is run by people. Not very well. Think Obama, then think Bush, lol. Other countries are worse, imo. As Madison put it: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

There, as many have said, that government that governs least governs best.

Society does a damned sight better governing itself.



And patience is a virtue. :rollseyes:

I don't have much patience.

Actually our government is not run by people, it is run by the political machine. ln reality I'd agree that we are better off than most, but, you did see the movie with Gabriel? He screwed over the entire human race..........What was the name of that movie.......Probably didn't answer your answer but be specific.

ramone
05-04-2012, 07:02 PM
I knew he would answer but felt like adding on since I thought Chris made a good point originally...figured you were putting it all out there for discussion but if you don't want me replying to your posts then just let me know and I won't have any problem with it. I know you guys go back to the Congress and FFA but didn't think that had anything to do with what I wrote. It's Friday going on evening and the only way things will turn south is if I run out of beer over on this end.

Messing with you CL, don't take my stuff personal. I'm kinda a trollish bastard, but chime in anytime you want. :)

Conley
05-04-2012, 07:05 PM
Messing with you CL, don't take my stuff personal. I'm kinda a trollish bastard, but chime in anytime you want. :)

:grin: I know how you roll, I've seen your work here and elsewhere. At the end of the day I know you're messing with me but understand that I will give it back to you when I can. :evil:

Say hey to Mike Green - Wing's post about cops made me remember him and the crap he had to deal with.

Conley
05-04-2012, 07:06 PM
Messing with you CL, don't take my stuff personal. I'm kinda a trollish bastard, but chime in anytime you want. :)

Kinda...or definitely? :cya20:

Chris
05-04-2012, 07:14 PM
I don't have much patience.

Actually our government is not run by people, it is run by the political machine. ln reality I'd agree that we are better off than most, but, you did see the movie with Gabriel? He screwed over the entire human race..........What was the name of that movie.......Probably didn't answer your answer but be specific.

But the political machine is run by people.

Gabriel, the angel, haven't seen movie.

How'd we get so far from the topic. I guess we could connect them by saying terrorists too are inept politically.

ramone
05-04-2012, 07:29 PM
But the political machine is run by people.

Gabriel, the angel, haven't seen movie.

How'd we get so far from the topic. I guess we could connect them by saying terrorists too are inept politically.

It wasn't a Gaberiel movie, there was a movie but it was a metaphor in reality. The angle was a turncoat, surely you have seen the series of movies. Not so far from reality when put into our modern day political crap.

You know I'm agnostic so,,,,,,,,, I can't even come close to the name but I remember Gaberiel in the pool and I think that dipshit that did the disco movies cut his wrists in an effort to save himself. Remember, that movie?

Mainecoons
05-04-2012, 07:46 PM
Al Qaeda these days is mainly an excuse to establish Homeland Security as a full fledged gestapo.

Conley
05-04-2012, 07:53 PM
It wasn't a Gaberiel movie, there was a movie but it was a metaphor in reality. The angle was a turncoat, surely you have seen the series of movies. Not so far from reality when put into our modern day political crap.

You know I'm agnostic so,,,,,,,,, I can't even come close to the name but I remember Gaberiel in the pool and I think that dipshit that did the disco movies cut his wrists in an effort to save himself. Remember, that movie?

Was it with Christopher Walken?