Teacher49

The awful attacks in Russian and Madrid in the past while demonstrate once again the stupidity of being quite so zealous about "security" just around airports and airplanes.

What to do? We cannot be screened before getting on every bus, every subway, train, ferry boat, before entering every theater or stadium.

OrlandoFlyer

I agree entirely with this posting. You cannot protect a country against terroism 100%. It is just not possible. Israel has proved this for years, and also the UK when the IRA were bombing the UK. These are classic examples of not being able to provide 100% protection against terroism.

The TSA and the "great pointy search" is just a knee jerk reaction against the events of 9/11. We all know that it is window dressing security at Airports. I only hope that common sense will eventually prevail in regards to overall security in this country before something like just happened Madrid happens in the USA. We need to spend our security dollars wisely in this country, and at the moment I seriously question whether we are.

jpatokal

Actually you can -- it's called Israel. And as their 50+ years of experience demonstrates, it doesn't matter how much security you have or how well even the general populace are trained to look out for anything out of the ordinary, a determined terrorist can still get through.


[This message has been edited by jpatokal (edited Mar 13, 2004).]

Dovster

I am going to agree with the generality but disagree with the specifics. In Israel's case, the very large majority of terrorists, no matter how determined, do not get through.

Some 95% of all terrorist attacks here are twarted, but Israel's situation is much different than America's.

Terrorist attacks here stem from three geographical locations: Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank.

The Lebanese border is hermetically sealed.

Israel has both human and electronic intelligence assets in Gaza and the West Bank that would be impossible to duplicate on a much larger scale.

Yes, we do get checked before getting into a shopping mall or a restaurant, but these are "last line of defense" precautions. If a terrorist has gotten that far, it means the other methods have already failed.



------------------
Sir Dovster, OBE
(Omni Boycotter Extraordinaire)

GUWonder

Security just shifts the threat potential and/or attempts to minimize or control the damage potential.

The stupidity of focusing only on airplanes is very near self-evident; however, fighting the last fight is always more attention-grabbing (and resource grabbing) than a rational and holistic analysis-based security action.

Everyone is fighting the last fight.

GUWonder

duplicate.

[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Mar 13, 2004).]

GUWonder

Sir Dovster, I am going to have to plagiarize from you this once and say I am going to agree with the generality but disagree with the specifics.

It is true that in Israel's case, the very large majority of terrorists, no matter how determined, do not get through to their ideal target. However, the 95% figure is overblown.

The casualty counts may be significantly lower on a given short- or medium-term time frame window because of Israel's security actions, but the majority of the determined terrorists (especially of the suicidal variety) do succeed in setting off a terrorist attack. [Thankfully, the security actions do significantly reduce the number of victims.]

Also, we fail to note that intrusive or coercive security actions have a tendency to help foster violent extremists and resistance movements over the longer term. Once that is added into the equation, the return on security investment changes substantially. That is something Israel's (and the Palestinians') hardliners are going to have to learn eventually if they hope to succeed in having a secure state whose populations are not under threat all the time.

Spiff

Agreed.

Obviously if they had been harassing travelers with Shoe Stupidity and the Great Sharp and Pointy Object Search, the tragic bombings would have never occured.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

GUWonder

Sad to see that this proved so true so soon, yet again.

Dovster

As sad as it is, it did not prove true your point true.

The overwhelming majority (if you want to dispute my 95% figure,fine. I can only say I heard it on Israeli TV about 2 months ago) of terrorist attacks are stopped.

Bomb and rocket factories are destroyed by the IDF. Would-be suicide bombers are taken in their own homes. These are the results of Israeli Intelligence operations. (Palestinians admit that their terrorist organizations are heavily infiltrated -- it is one of the reasons they cite for their constant killing of "collaborators".)

Those that make it through this first hurdle are often stopped at the checkposts crossing into Israel (two were killed in gun battle earlier this week).

The successes have saved thousands of Israeli lives. One very good example was the attempt to blow up the Azrieli Towers (two 50-story buildings in Tel Aviv) on May 7, 2002. A truck filled with explosives -- more than enough to do the job several times over -- was discovered on its way to the site.

As I said earlier, the attempts that are stopped by security guards at restaurant and mall entries represent only the failures of earlier efforts.

None of this stops terrorism completely. Even the security fence will not do that, although even before completion it has resulted in a 50% reduction in terrorist attacks in the past year. (This is the fence so hated by Progressive Peace Lovers everywhere, including, no doubt, that prime example of Liberal Enlightenment who recently posted a gleeful letter on Omni hoping for the nuclear destruction of Israel.)

------------------
Sir Dovster, OBE
(Omni Boycotter Extraordinaire)

[This message has been edited by Dovster (edited Mar 14, 2004).]

GUWonder

Glad to see OMNI still lives in your heart.

Gleeful letter hoping for nuclear destruction? No, anything but. It would be nice to have the land in tact for both peoples to return to when they learn to get along or there is no hope for return.

It was just a note, in jest but not glee, that if the fight is about territory, get rid of the territory that is disputed and give everyone -- Israelis and Palestinians -- a one year relocation package to Australia.

It is sort of like dealing with two siblings fighting over a toy. The parents take away the toy, and then the nastier aspects of the fight normally stop -- at least for a while.

Actually, I like the idea of the fence. I just think it should just follow the '67 border/lines of control and internationalize Jerusalem as a 3rd state.

In regards to security and safety of visiting Israel, do you think it will be safer to visit Israel next year than it was 4 years ago? I ask that question because I presume the Afghan-effect of Iraq will lead to a cheap weapons proliferation that will help the extremists amongst the Palestinians acquire capabilities to wreak even more military-like atrocities and terrorism that will negatively impact the safety and security of travellers there.

Do you agree?

[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Mar 14, 2004).]

Dovster

That is not the letter I was referring to. I was referring to the one posted by a particularly sick individual who specifically called for Israel's nuclear destruction adding, "I will be watching live on CNN , Ghauri missle from Pakistan loaded with nukes fall on Tel Aviv. 3 minutes and all of middle-east vanishes. What is left is nothing but heavenly bliss in the rest of the world. Problem solved. US can then withdraw from Iraq. No more American blood would then be spilled for Israel."




------------------
Sir Dovster, OBE
(Omni Boycotter Extraordinaire)

GUWonder

I would never think such. I do not believe such militaristic aggression would do much for the cause of peace or advancement of any nation's interest.

It does seem to most common observers that such an attack on Tel Aviv would likely eliminate a plurality of Palestinians nearby too. Furthermore, probably millions of Pakistanis would perish thereafter since Israel is not famous for exercising restraint when it feels threatened let alone attacked and would send some nukes in the other direction too.

If that poster was Pakistani, I would not be surprised by such sentiment. After all, it is suspected in Pakistani intelligence circles and by others in the educated echelons of Pakistan that Israeli intelligence had attempted to get a better sense of Pakistan's nuclear program and disable it (if possible), but had to abort such an attempt (in regards to disabling the program). Even Indian intelligence would not play nice with Israel on such a matter. The fallout (pun intended) would be huge.

Israeli and American intelligence's secondary concern with Pakistan's nuclear program lately has been that we suspect that the Saudis had not only obviously financed the Pakistani nuclear program but also had essentially an option to acquire 2 to 3 devices which is believed to have been exercised.

Edit: Dovster, after researching that thread just now, I can see why one may think OMNI is not all it is cut out to be. I guess in OMNI you hear it all.

[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Mar 14, 2004).]

TSAMGR

Ah yes, Bush should turn around to Ridge and say "They are targeting trains now, forget the air planes."

------------------
{Everyone has a right to an opinion no matter how wrong they may be}

Spiff

That would be about right for this administration. They have demonstrated the ability only to react and and stupidly. Proactive security is beyond the capabilities of these fools.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry