Why has there been no repeat of 9/11?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus christ, i agree with bluffthis.

"Plus the fact that ordinary american heroes like the ones who died in that Pennsylvania field and who stopped the shoe bomber are also stepping up and letting the terrorists know that not only do they have to get past the government but also everyday joe."

During the last three years i flew close to 200 domestic flights for work, and the conclusion that i came up with was that the most effective deterrent against hijacking that could exist is that no plane would allow themselves to be hijacked again. Just give the frikin' cockpits doors that can't be shouldered down, and give the flight attendants training and mace and your fine as long as you keep bombs off the flight.
BTW the security is a joke- i actually carried several "weapons" onto planes- once when i was physically searched with my bags twice. They did find and confiscate a butter knife though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love that they give you metal forks and plastic butter knives. Like you cant do some intense damage with a fork.

[XxGodJrxX]

You forgot an option.

"The terrorists are too busy laughing at their good fortune of having the Republicans do their work for them."

[lehighguy]

Combonation of the above

[CORed]

I see two possibilities. The first is that the Bush administration is doing such a good job in the "War on Terror" that Al Qaeda has had no opportunitis to mount further attacks. Yeah, I know, pretty far-fetched to think that gang of buffoons has gotten something right.

The other possibility is that the threat was vastly overrated in the first place. Maybe Al Queda got really lucky on 9/11. Maybe their crazy plan was so crazy (and our security for air travel so bad) that it worked. Actually, it only worked three out of four times on 9/11. The tactic of hijacking plains with box cutters and flying them into buildings only worked as long as passengers and flight crew didn't realize that worse things than getting sliced with a box cutter would happen if they cooperated. The passengers on the fourth flight realized that they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by fighting back.

In the first few months after 9/11, in an effort to prevent any more attacks using a method that was already obsolete, our leaders tightened airport security before having adequate staff in place, resulting in huge backups in the screening lines, which meant that we now had huge crowds of people in the unsecured part of airport terminals. I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop. I expected suitcase bombs, or suicide bombers, since Al Queda seems to have an inexplicable (to me anyway) liking for suicide attacks, in the airport terminals. As luck would have it, Al Queda's leaders failed to anticipate this development, and failed to take advantage of the opportunity after it developed.

At this time, the whole government, hell, the whole country, was pretty much running around like chickens with their heads cut off, so I can't buy the notion that the Bush gang had anyting to do with it. When you look at Al Queda's history, other than 9/11, their successful attacks have amounted to a few suicide bombings that haven't in the grand scheme of things, amounted to much more than a nuisance. This is not to minimize the tragedy for the people they have killed and their families, but, in truth, our efforts should have directed at rounding these folks up and killing them or arresting them. Hell, this is the same gang of clowns whose operatives got caught after the 1993 WTC bombing because they tried to get the deposit back on the rental truck they blew up. We're not dealing with rocket scientists here, thank God.

Instead, our leaders decided to invade Iraq, and use the attack as an excuse to advance their agenda to turn our country into a fascist police state. We are now bogged down in occupations in Iraq, and Afghanistan that, if anything, are strenthening the terrorists. We had more cause to invade Saudi Arabia than Iraq. Our efforts in Afghanistan should have been directed at catching the bad guys, not nation building. We are fortunate indeed that our enemy is almost as incompetent as our leadership. Were than not the case, we would be in deep trouble indeed. Well, we are in deep trouble, but not from Al Queda.

[lehighguy]

In Afghanistan how can you catch the bad guys when the government in charge is a direct ally and supporter of them.

If you going to remove them, don't you have to put something in place to prevent a power vacumm and chaos, which aids the enemy,

[CORed]

Invading Afghanistan was necessary. If anything, we were too easy on them immediately after 9/11. However, continuing occupation is not likely to be productive. A power vacuum and chaos seems to be the natural state of Afghanistan. No matter when we leave Afghanistan or Iraq, a government we don't like will probably take power. If they start harboring terrorists again, we will have to deal with them. Invading and occupying all of south Asia, because people we don't like may rule there is not a viable strategy.

Someone referred to them earlier as "buffoons", (funny thing is that he had a higher gpa in college than the other presidential canidate did), but I believe the Bush administration is doing several things right. Look at how many plots have been disrupted.

Also, contrary to what some lib's believe, the war in Iraq is also working to do this. It is a hell of alot easier logistically for them to fight us there than here. The benefit for us is they have to fight our military which is what our military is supposed to do.

[superleeds]

You forgot the conspiracy option. Excellent post.

[ QUOTE ]
Instead, our leaders decided to invade Iraq, and use the attack as an excuse to advance their agenda to turn our country into a fascist police state.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where you lost me. We are no where near living in a fascist police state. This phrase has repeatedly been used as a partisan attack on GWB and its becoming rather pathetic.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
If you asked most people on 9/12/2001, they would have never predicted that there would not be another major terrorist attack in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]And if you asked most people on 9/10/2001, they would have never predicted that there WOULD be a major terrorist attack in the US.

So what? Humans have a documented, very strong tendency to believe that things will continue on their current path. E.g. if the stock market rises, it will continue to rise indefinitely.

[ QUOTE ]
Why has there been no repeat of 9/11?

[/ QUOTE ] You keep underestimating those guys. You truly think they will go at ya the same way? They won't. You can bet all your chips on it!

My guess would be (in case they want to re-send a message they have already delivered) sea ports. Wide, wide open opportunities.