US-Soil Plot Foiled?

Status
Not open for further replies.
General comments not withstanding, should we be talking about security measures on our military bases on an open forum on the internet? A lot of us have had or do have access to things terrorists would love to know, maybe we should keep our mouths shut about specifics.

Does anyone want me to go into the security measures surrounding naval nuclear powered ships and their reactor compartments?

Didn't think so, and I never will.

Loose lips do sink ships.
 
budney - you can only judge this to be a "ridiculous non-threat" after the fact when they've failed. Then you hint that we're sheep for being concerned.
And dream up a ludicrous hypothetical situation to illustrate how silly our concern is.

Just because the person trying to beat me up in the bar is a sloppy drunk and not a fully credentialled mall ninja doesn't mean I shouldn't be concerned.

By the law of averages and luck, one of these days they might succeed in something. I'm concerned that they're here and trying, not that they're complete professionals.
 
"Special" jihadists.

I think that these particular gomers rode to terrorist school on a very short bus. The FBI finally arrested them after months of observation out of pity. It just wasn't funny watching them step on their own cranks any more.
If this was the caliber of adversary we had to face overseas, Six Flags Over Mecca would have been the hot family getaway for the last 4 years.
 
I have to admit that I'm surprised by some of the posts here.

IMHO any terrorist armed with anything is a danger. The fact that these guys was caught was a fluke. One shop keeper turned them in. If they had went to the same shop on a different day or shift they may not have been caught.

They were shut down when trying to buy full auto guns from a government informant. They were not just talking a tough game, they were going up to bat.

Walking on a military base and killing our soldiers especially on US soil would have a much larger impact than shooting up a mall or school. Any kid could do that.
 
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?

Ah, well, it's more complex than that. The ones who flew the planes into the WTC weren't Einsteins, but they didn't have to be. They were still dangerous partly because the fools in the federal government enabled them. I mean, Atta showed up at a Federal agency in a corny disguise, asked for money to buy cropdusting airplanes, and threatened to cut the throat of the dumbass Liberal lady in the office. And they let him walk out. So instead he got a little flight training, bought an airline ticket, and drove the 757 into a building. He was a Grade A doofus but he still beat the AAA doofuses guarding the gates.

Oh, and then they finally got around to issuing his visa.
 
Definitely Muslim terrorists.

Well, actually this may be the first non-terrorist thing the other side has tried. Ft Dix IS a legitimate military target... and since they don't represent a signatory to the Geneva Convention they aren't required to abide by it with regard to bearing weapons openly and wearing uniforms.

Illegal aliens every one

Illegal aliens, or invading enemy combatants? Our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan don't exactly get their passport stamped either.

The first thought of terrorists with limited funds, training, and supplies is... ATTACK AN ARMY BASE populated by tens of thousands of men with guns?!?

The vast majority of US servicemembers see a firearm once or twice per year when not actually deployed. The only Soldiers armed on a daily basis are MPs on duty.
 
As you said tanksoldier, this is a legitimate attack by our enemy in a time of war. Attacking a military base of your enemy is one of a few M.O. s used during a war.

That being said, I'm glad the flunkies fell flat on their faces. Granted, as has been pointed out multiple times, these guys ain't too bright. Good work on the part of the FBI.

Oh, and wait, they didn't even have to use the Patriot Act, or suspend habeas corpus, or do a warrantless search to do it. Just had to do good police work.

And if all this evidence as is they've said, well... If I got to sit on the jury, I'd have no problem seeing these fine illegal immigrants were the recipients of a fair and impartial trial followed by a first class hanging.

Constitutional!
 
budney - you can only judge this to be a "ridiculous non-threat" after the fact when they've failed.
Are you trying to say that they might have taken Fort Dix after all? That we can't tell that they're a bunch of morons based on the mere fact that they intended to storm a military base with fewer men than, oh, a softball team? Please.

And dream up a ludicrous hypothetical situation to illustrate how silly our concern is.
Three men taking the Nimitz is "ludicrous," but six men taking Fort Dix is a legitimate threat to be feared? Wow.

Just because the person trying to beat me up in the bar is a sloppy drunk and not a fully credentialled mall ninja doesn't mean I shouldn't be concerned.
Concerned enough to carry a firearm, maybe. Sure. But concerned enough to sell away your habeas corpus, fourth and fifth amendment rights? To abdicate your rights as a citizen and beg daddy government to protect you? From six dipsh-ts who've watched too many movies?

On the one hand we have the PATRIOT act, the MCA, the trillion-dollar forever war on a tactic, etc. On the other hand we have the Miami Seven and the Fort Dix Six.

By the law of averages and luck, one of these days they might succeed in something.
You mean that some collection of dipsh-ts might actually win a direct confrontation with the US armed forces? That's what the Miami Seven and the Fort Dix Six were planning. Well, maybe. But you'd be better off playing the lottery than betting on that. Which brings us back to the original question: do these ridiculously negligible risks actually justify the elimination of our rights as American citizens "for our own protection"?

--Len.
 
Ah, well, it's more complex than that. The ones who flew the planes into the WTC weren't Einsteins, but they didn't have to be.
True--but they did have a viable plan, which was created by men who at least had triple-digit IQs.

They were still dangerous partly because the fools in the federal government enabled them. I mean, Atta showed up at a Federal agency in a corny disguise, asked for money...
Exactly! Yet we're being asked to give up the 800-year-old right of habeas corpus so the same doofuses who allowed 9/11 to happen can "protect" us from further terrorist attacks. The protection is worthless, but the right we're asked to give up is priceless.

And they add insult to injury by parading deranged morons on TV as proof that they're "protecting" us! How stupid do they think we are? Well, unfortunately, we seem to be stupid enough for their purposes...

[Atta] was a Grade A doofus but he still beat the AAA doofuses guarding the gates. Oh, and then they finally got around to issuing his visa.
Yup. AFTER 9/11, the dead hijacker actually got his freaking visa. From the same idiots who promise that they can keep us safe, for the low low price of giving up our rights under the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments.

--Len.
 
General comments not withstanding, should we be talking about security measures on our military bases on an open forum on the internet? A lot of us have had or do have access to things terrorists would love to know, maybe we should keep our mouths shut about specifics.
There are a lot of people who have access to these bases. Probably a fair number of Moslems, maybe some in sensitive places. I doubt they have any trouble at all getting all the detailed information they want, just for the asking.

Does anyone want me to go into the security measures surrounding naval nuclear powered ships and their reactor compartments?
One of the things that makes something secure is the knowledge by those who would attack it that it is secure. Exact details are not needed (like today's password, or the color of the badge one would wear today), but general details don't harm security.
 
"That’s in my neck of the woods. Damn, looks like it’s time to buy some more ammo."

Mine too. I'm in Mt. Laurel. I'm glad they weren't planning to shoot up the Cherry Hill Mall. There are so many easy targets in the Greater Philly area (lots of unarmed people, railroads, bridges, big buildings, etc.) that I have to wonder why they were going after Fort Dix.

Fortunately, these guys weren't very bright. They took their little jihad video to a local store, to have transfered to a DVD, and the clerk called Mt. Laurel's Finest, who called the FBI.

Way too close to home. Freaks me out, a little.
 
IMHO any terrorist armed with anything is a danger.
Of course--just like a single hopped-up mugger with a shank is a danger. One worth preparing for by going armed. But NOT one worth giving up our civil rights in sheer terror. The guys who made the Fort Dix Six into a media event are the same guys who think we need the USA PATRIOT act and the MCA to be protected from... that?!?

They were shut down when trying to buy full auto guns from a government informant. They were not just talking a tough game, they were going up to bat.
Where "up to bat" means, "they appeared to intend seriously to attack a US military base." OK, that's pretty funny. Their arrest is funny, as would be their deaths in a hail of gunfire and the subsequent writeup for their Darwin awards.

But it certainly isn't "ZOMG! Save me! Take my 4th-8th amendment rights! Anything! Just save me!" material.

--Len.
 
Rule #1: All guns are always loaded.

This addresses both the safety issue (one must never think a weapon is not dangerous), and readiness (you exist, therefore you are a target).

Seems that "making guns safe" is actually more dangerous. Dorking around with loaded weapons leads to accidents. Leaving the thing be means not causing anything to happen. Guns only fire when you do something to them.

Every soldier should indeed be carrying a loaded weapon at all times (save when an AD/ND would prove devastatingly dangerous, such as setting off a fuel depot). They are soldiers, therefore they are targets, and may be hit at any time.

Which comes to...

The sheer absurdity of extending the "gun-free zone" notion to military bases. As we've seen repeatedly, "gun-free zones" attract would-be mass murderers precisely because nobody can fight back. For such a location to be a military base of all places requires a failure of leadership so perverse as to warrant wholesale abandonment thereof. That terrorists seriously considered breaking into a military base with machineguns to kill as many people as possible, based on the notion that they would not, after all, be shot on sight by the first people to see them, raises serious doubts about the sanity of our military leaders.

This incident gives lie to the popular notion that the 2nd Amendment is passe'. If a military base, within our borders, is a viable target for a few nuts with little more than submachineguns, then surely the occupants of that base are in no position to protect the rest of us who may suddenly find ourselves on the front line of enemy assault.
 
Talking to a buddy who is a major in the Army this morning and Fort Dix has the moniker of "Fort Disneyland" apparently.

Also, as many have previously said, an Army base is apparently great to go on a killing spree on, no one is armed except a few sparsely positioned individuals. Sounds like a huge win-win for the attackers: high body count of defenseless American soldiers, as well as bragging rights for their "daring".
 
Well, as we all talk I am sure the military is reviewing security of military bases across the country. The one question to ask is:
Did the Security forces at Fort Dix know of the plot before the arrests?
Did they have any additional preparations made just in case?

And Now I would like to thank the shop keeper who turned them in. Every time something happens involving some kind of firearm, terrorist plot, etc it ends up costing everyone something. Money, just to investigate, and try to prevent another from happening. Our freedoms, Gun Control advocates just eat this up. Just the knowledge fo the whole thing encourages others to try. My best advice, either lock'em up down at gitmo and let them wait till we get to them, or just charge them with treason, and do away with them. This whole thing uses up way too much time, money, and still accomplishes part of thier goal.
I know agencies are doing things to prevent these acts, even though they are overwhelmed and often get complacent, they do what they can. Sometimes events like this should go unpublished. I am sure some do, but this one should be one of them. The money spent on this event will end up costing 10's of millions with newspapers, TV time etc. Money that should be spent other ways. I would love to hear how they used that money to train, and equip more agencies to get the job done rather than furthering the goals of terrorists. Anyway just my nickle (two cents is out due to inflation) on that.
 
Dear All

Do not worry, even though it was the army, I imagine it would have been short.

In the Marines, every "neighborhood" had a guard house or two with 30-50 Marines waiting to be told to kill some people. I nearly discussed response times, but that would not be smart. Instead I will simply say, it would end quickly and decisively.

I cannot imagine any enemy group on unfamiliar territory (we drilled several times a week) lasting long enough to see the HMMVs with heavy weapons, and they were there pretty quick. And that was before 9/11

Former Marine
Corporal DigitalWarrior
(I spent time in area guard.)
 
Foet Dix is a very 'soft' target, and access is easy because of all the public roads that go through it.
 
Are you trying to say that they might have taken Fort Dix after all? That we can't tell that they're a bunch of morons based on the mere fact that they intended to storm a military base with fewer men than, oh, a softball team? Please.

Budney, allow me to introduce you to my friend, the CLUE BAT.

They weren't going to "take Ft. Dix".

Thank you for the strawman. Set it up. Knock it down.

They were going to go and murder US soldiers, on US soil. This would be a huge win for them. Even if they only managed to kill twenty or thirty. (which anyone who has ever been on a base will tell you, no problemo).

They weren't going to "storm" the base. Thanks for another strawman. This isn't GI Joe vs. Cobra.

If I were them, and I had five other suicidal guys with rifles, and the element of surprise, I know that I would have no problem killing several dozen people in the first few minutes. My ultimate goal would be to take a building with military hostages, and try to milk the standoff as long as possible.

While the response was being prepared, I would make sure to saw off as many heads on video as possible.

And if you don't think a "group smaller than a softball team" is capable of doing that, then you don't know jack squat about small unit tactics or dedicated individuals.

As for them being stupid, and getting caught. If you knew jack about criminal investigation you would know that is normally how it works. Somewhere along the line, somebody screws up, talks to much, does something stupid, and that's how we get them.

So, because you are ignorant of small unit tactics, or the willingness of Muslim extremists to use them, then it all must be some sort of sinister plot by George Bush, and DHS to make us all scared?

No, everytime a crazy jihadi is arrested, then it is all a plot to support the patriot act. Surely there aren't any actual bad people in the world who want to saw your head off.

Man, I'm not scared yet. We better roll up some more innocent muslims and water board them. :rolleyes:

Give me a fricking break.
 
It does not matter how smart these JO were.
It does not matter how fast the response would have been by the military.
It does not matter how many bullet holes the JO ended up having in their bodies.

All they needed to do is kill one person, military or civilian on a US base on US soil to win the battle.

We got a lucky break and they were stopped before the attack. I will narrow my mind down to some of the levels here and put it in words that some may understand.

Forget about the world wide war on terror. Lets just look at it real simple.

Terrorist buying weapons of any type off of American streets and using them to attack military bases on US soil is not going to help our cause. Nothing good could come of this attack.
 
They were going to go and murder US soldiers, on US soil. This would be a huge win for them. Even if they only managed to kill twenty or thirty. (which anyone who has ever been on a base will tell you, no problemo).

This is an excellent argument for allowing SM's concealed carry on post. All the SM's already have met every requirment that would be needed to get a CHL anyway.

There are a lot of people who have access to these bases. Probably a fair number of Moslems, maybe some in sensitive places. I doubt they have any trouble at all getting all the detailed information they want, just for the asking.

As the article pointed out the pizza guy can ride around post all day and look at pretty much everything.

Well, actually this may be the first non-terrorist thing the other side has tried. Ft Dix IS a legitimate military target... and since they don't represent a signatory to the Geneva Convention they aren't required to abide by it with regard to bearing weapons openly and wearing uniforms.

Disagree. Islamic terrorists have attacked multiple military targets throughout the years. It is just that our response during the old presidency was less than what was likely called for.
 
This is an excellent argument for allowing SM's concealed carry on post. All the SM's already have met every requirment that would be needed to get a CHL anyway.
Agreed, but I wouldn't limit it to just NCOs. Regular civillians with less training manage to carry guns all of the time, and we manage not to do stupid crap. Especially nowadays when such a high number of regular troops have been deployed to combat zones, let everybody who wants to be armed, be armed.

Locally, the Adjunct General of the Utah NG has gone on a spree disarming everyone, including security. Personally, I think this makes him lower than pig dung.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top