Article

2004-09-23 Terror Networks

Belmont Club: why size and state sponsorship matter to terror networks

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike 2004-09-23 6:55:14 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The recent report of the Palestinian girl boomer that was stopped by Israeli police is another case in point. Estimates are that an effective homicide boomer operation uses approximately 90 folks in the entire chain. This chain includes: the recruiter, religious savants and psychologists, technicians with boomer background, transportation, identification/permit providers, etc.

In most cases, the boomer is a singular event, one target-one boomer. When more than two are used, thereâs always the possibility the second in line will witness the first boomer turn to hash and chicken out. Hereâs where the backup comes in. If either the first boomer, or the second appear to be hesitant, thereâs often a cell phone actuated capability on the package, which will be initiated by the backup.

The best time to interrupt the event is in the reconnaissance and dry run stage. The participants will time the event over and overâ¦almost zombie like.

We hear of the obvious successes and failures, but never of the many that donât come off due to diligence by Israeli police. May God bless them!

Posted by RN 2004-09-23 7:47:39 AM|| 2004-09-23 7:47:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 All the more reason to shift our focus away from Europe and toward the key frontline states, which will make or break us.

Wretchard's analysis suggests that our success depends mainly on vigorous and effective intel and other help from key regional powers in disrupting these networks. Israel, Russia, India and Pak, Indonesia, etc are vastly more important to us than NATO.

Posted by lex 2004-09-23 11:08:15 AM|| 2004-09-23 11:08:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 I agree with the importance he gives to state sponsors.

But "understanding why the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the toppling of Saddam Hussein may have cripped global terrorism so badly" seems to me bizarre -- shouldn't he have first shown us global terrorism to have been crippled, instead of taking it as an assumption?

Global terrorism doesn't seem particularly "crippled" to me.

I'd have rephrased his sentence to say instead: "His last paragraph is crucial to understanding why the survival of the Surian and Iranian regimes have prevented global terrorism from being crippled"

It's *not* about "vigorous and effective intel". It's about destroying the regimes that support Islamofascist terrorism.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-23 11:35:40 AM|| 2004-09-23 11:35:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Lex, dear, we got the message about our new allies. Please give that bit a rest now, ok? Stick to all the rest of your commentary -- its the new insights that you bring that will soonest influence minds. Thanks much!

Aris, perhaps by "may have cripped global terrorism so badly" he was thinking that the World Trade Center attack was the last spectacularly big action al Qaeda has taken? Even the 3/11 attack in Spain, while horrific to the victims, was merely annoying to the rest of the commuters heading in to the office -- at least until they discovered why the train schedule was all screwed up. 9/11 on the other hand, shut down a world financial center for a week, and cost New York City billions of dollars, and the U.S. even more so (anyone have actual amounts?) I realize that a.Q. certainly planned more spectacles, but they haven't been able to carry them off. Otherwise I agree with your revised formulation.

Posted by trailing wife 2004-09-23 12:03:25 PM|| 2004-09-23 12:03:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 "he was thinking that the World Trade Center attack was the last spectacularly big action al Qaeda has taken?"

If by "crippling global terrorism" he meant this then he is just stupid. It's the most parochial, shorteyed reason I can imagine. Not to mention its patently false.

Is Zarqawi nothing? Is Beslan nothing?

In the period before 9/11 nothing bad had happened either in America. Was Al Qaeda "crippled" then? This is a definition of crippled that nobody in their sane minds can use.

3/11 took down a whole government. Bombs in Iraq keep on killing police recruits and others by the hundreds. The Islamofascists have I-don't-know-how-many cities under their control. Sadr has been practically declared untouchable and he parades around as the new Saddam.

"9/11 shut down a world financial center for a week" ? Cost you billion of dollars? Frankly that's small potatoes compared to what's being accomplished done by terrorism since -- namely squashing the hope of Iraqi democracy to survive.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-23 12:30:10 PM|| 2004-09-23 12:30:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 You have to remember that in the period before 9/11 the techniques were being perfected almost always in Afghanistan. Remember the indian airline hijack which lead to the release of Masood Azhar, that should have been a real eye opener. For the first time since 70's a State (Afghanistan) actually hosted the hijackers allowed them to complete their mission and allowed them to escape. But at that time "IT WAS A PART OF CRAZY MIDDLE EAST NOTHING TO DO WITH US"

Posted by Fawad 2004-09-23 1:34:10 PM|| 2004-09-23 1:34:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Aris

Where the Olympic Games disrupted? No? Then you have your proof that AL Q and similar have been weriouly weakened.

Posted by JFM 2004-09-23 3:19:20 PM|| 2004-09-23 3:19:20 PM|| Front Page Top

13:27 Dreadnought
12:59 lex
12:44 Bulldog
12:29 Bulldog
04:23 Sock Puppet of Doom
02:30 SCpatriot
02:06 lex
00:37 Rafael
00:21 trailing wife
00:20 Zenster
00:05 tipper
23:58 Atomic Conspiracy
23:53 OldSpook
23:43 tibor
23:10 cingold
23:00 Cyber Sarge
22:54 Dave D.
22:53 Jarhead
22:44 Mike Sylwester
22:44 Jarhead
22:41 Jarhead
22:40 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:38 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:38 Steve White