Kali Endgame
member
An attack on a US base on US soil wouldnt' do much strategicaly(sp), but it would do for them what the Doolittle(sp) raid did for us in WW2.
US-Soil Plot Foiled?
- Thread starter cavman
- Start date
- Status
Does it bother anyone else that these terrorists are so incompetent?
I got to wonder if there are so many incompetent terrorist cells that get caught, isn't that just teaching the other ones to be better at what they do?
On top of using up resources on expendable groups that might well better be put to working on the more competent cells?
I got to wonder if there are so many incompetent terrorist cells that get caught, isn't that just teaching the other ones to be better at what they do?
On top of using up resources on expendable groups that might well better be put to working on the more competent cells?
I suspect that the better ones are the ones who help deter/bust these groups. Remember that before 9/11, groups within the US gave considerable cash and support to terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Some but not all of that was cut off after 9/11. Those groups, which still receive funds, don't want to see their funds cut off, so they don't want to rock the boat within the US too much. So, they either stop actions here in the US before they start, or offer up the occasional numbskulls who don't know better than making life difficult for the fellow travelers and useful idiots within the US.
The idea of domestic terrorists attempting to gain the means to attack a military post rings hollow to me.
They've got all the opportunity in the world to attack military targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why "waste" resources within the US border to attack military targets? Why not use these resources to attack civilian or other "soft" targets?
Just doesn't make sense.
They've got all the opportunity in the world to attack military targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why "waste" resources within the US border to attack military targets? Why not use these resources to attack civilian or other "soft" targets?
Just doesn't make sense.
budney
member
Wow--what a bunch of hooey. Six Muslims decide to attack Fort Dix instead of, say, a shopping mall or an elementary school. Yeah, right. The same boobs that caught the "Miami Seven" now bring you the "Fort Dix Six."
If this is the best homeland security can come up with, then we should rejoice: there are obviously no credible threats out there.
--Len.
If this is the best homeland security can come up with, then we should rejoice: there are obviously no credible threats out there.
--Len.
Last edited:
joab
Member
Come on an attack by six people against a US military base on US soil, how much more terrorist cred can you get.
When even military bases are not safe from the wrath of Islam how can the civilian population feel safe in their homes at night when their warriors are slaughtered like lambs.
LightningJoe
Member
America benefits from stupid enemies. We need them, because we've got a lot of stupid defenders (Pelosi et al).
budney
member
Make up your mind: are we fighting a war because against morons who can't find their posterior with both hands because we're terrified to "fight them here"? Or are we grasping at straws to inflate a nonexistent threat to keep the people afraid?
By "we" I mean the administration of course. So which is it? Is the administration a bunch of fools who launched an invasion because they're afraid of a duck, or are they a machiavellian bunch of liars?
--Len.
A lot depends on how these six guys see themselves and their objectives. Hating the US doesn't automatically make them homicidal mass murderers with civilian body count on their minds.
If they see themselves as terrorists, then they would be willing to attack civilian targets in order to maximize body count. If they saw themselves as freedom fighters, they're pretty much stuck hitting military and infrastructure targets. If they were trying to inflict the maximum harm on the US, then they would stay under the radar and perform raids against infrastructure targets. If they were trying for the maximum PR value, then they'd do a suicidal charge on a high significance target.
So, if the guys were self styled freedom fighters who wanted to make a huge PR impact by going out in a blaze of glory, a one time suicidal attack on a military installation makes a lot of sense.
geim druth
Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2006
- Messages
- 270
These types of small, independent cells are difficult to stop. They arise seemingly spontaneously. Their members are not suspected of anything by the police or by their neighbors. They have no links to a larger organization that counter-intelligence can use to find and track them. When the attack is over, they are all dead, leaving nothing but inspiration to other men of like minds.
budney
member
Terrorists aren't usually interested in going out "in a blaze of glory" all by themselves. They like to take a few people with them. And it would hardly be a "huge PR impact," beyond Jay Leno and Jon Stewart calling them dipsh-ts on air for a few days.
--Len.
joab
Member
Ever been on a military base
Those tne of thousands of men are unarmed.
The only ones with quick access to firearms are the MPs and on many bases what you think are MPs are just overflow from the other units on gate duty.
Not only do they not have access to their military weapons but they are not allowed to carry guns or ammo in the private vehicle.
Once you get through the gate a military base is one of the softest targets you will ever find on US soil.
And not nly are there those tens of thousands of men there is also the wives and children of those men shopping, going to movies, bowling and just about any other activity that you will find outside the gates.
Six men
Two to the PX complex
Two to the hospital
and Two to the commissary
All unarmed soft targets suitable for your garden variety media attention getting bloodbath, and some would still stand a good chance of getting off the base if they know their way around
Elza
Member
joab nailed it. VERY few are armed or have access to arms on an Army post. You would be astounded how many could be killed by six terrorists. I believe (hope anyway) that they would be more likely to be rushed and disarmed by troops than sheeple in a normal soft target situation. But in the meantime they could do a lot of damage.
Thank God for Assemblywoman Pam Lampitt, Democrat Cherry Hill, for just introducing more gun control legislation. Cherry Hill, the nation's most obnoxious town where there's literally more sheeple per capita than anywhere else in the world. No wonder terrorists are choosing this location. Look for the "Terrorists Rights" march any day in that liberal cesspool, I **** you not.
Should have waited for them to actually try it.
I mean, it was a FORT, for chrissakes. Just alert all US personnel and make sure they're armed and ready. Keep tabs on the 6 and lead them into a trap. Kill them then and there, and be done with it.
But no, now they're going to live off my tax money for decades, while jerk-offs protest outside the jail and Noam Chomsky turns them into heroes to academics in the Social Sciences.
I mean, it was a FORT, for chrissakes. Just alert all US personnel and make sure they're armed and ready. Keep tabs on the 6 and lead them into a trap. Kill them then and there, and be done with it.
But no, now they're going to live off my tax money for decades, while jerk-offs protest outside the jail and Noam Chomsky turns them into heroes to academics in the Social Sciences.
Sounds to me like most run of the mill bases are pretty soft.
I spent some time on an Army base once (about 9 months). I look back on it and think how easy it would have been for a terrorist to drive right past the civilian guard armed with a revolver and go just about any where on the base within a few minutes. i saw a lot of military people there but very few guns in evidence.
jlbraun said:
After 8.5 years of running around the woods of Fort Dix and Lakehurst NAES with an AK-47 shooting the "Good Guys" as an OPFOR role player, I can say, with the proper planning, it would have been an easy task to shoot and scoot across vast areas of all three bases pretty much un-hampered. Unless the Army, Air Force, and Navy want to piss off a large portion of the population of central NJ by blocking off miles and miles of roadways, they cannot fully secure those bases without tons of money invested in remote electronic surveillance equipment. There is no way to do it with traditional fences and check points. Before 911, Texas Ave, the main road which traverses through Fort Dix, was open to public travel because it saved travelers about 15 minutes of drive time. Now unless you have a Mil ID, you have to go around Fort Dix and McGuire proper, but the vast majority of Fort Dix is on the "un-secure" Impact Area side which can still be driven on. Same thing with Lakehurst NAES, the main portion of that base is very small compared to the huge amount of land the base actually occupies.
MikeG
Member
There's also the DOD schools (ala Beslan) on some bases, plus the barracks and Base housing. This attack could have had a huge impact had it succeeded.
axeman_g
Member
Cherry Hill is my hometown. It is a liberal bastion. Funny they lived here considering the Jewish pop of the town must be close to 50%. I dont think they would have felt very welcome...
Ft Dix is the largest mobilization center in the US for all forces going overeas. I hunted pheasant there last year... walked about 8 miles with a loaded shotgun and was only stopped at the gate when I checked in. I was suprised to say the least.
From what I understand these guys stuck out like sore thumbs here. Screw ups, thank god.
Ft Dix is the largest mobilization center in the US for all forces going overeas. I hunted pheasant there last year... walked about 8 miles with a loaded shotgun and was only stopped at the gate when I checked in. I was suprised to say the least.
From what I understand these guys stuck out like sore thumbs here. Screw ups, thank god.
budney
member
It's interesting how worked up some people seem to get over a ridiculous non-threat. It isn't high-road to call others "sheep," but I think there's a stronger reason that some of us shouldn't do that: people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
"ZOMG! So you're saying that three mentally retarded homeless terrorists were plotting to sneak onto the Nimitz with box cutters, take over and wreak havoc on the entire Eastern seaboard? Thank goodness the heroes at Homeland Security stopped them in time!"
--Len.
"ZOMG! So you're saying that three mentally retarded homeless terrorists were plotting to sneak onto the Nimitz with box cutters, take over and wreak havoc on the entire Eastern seaboard? Thank goodness the heroes at Homeland Security stopped them in time!"
--Len.
- Status
