Sunday, May 21, 2006

The "War" on Terror

Have you noticed how much of what passes for the "war" on terror is really the appearance of security rather than real steps to protect us? Go into a high-rise building and a rent-a-cop is likely to ask who you're visiting and then for an ID. As if I couldn't call up, say, a law firm, tell someone that I'm a potential new client and make an appointment. Then get a fake driver's license--it probably wouldn't have to be a very good fake--go to the law firm's office and excuse myself to use the men's room, leaving my briefcase behind while I take the elevator or even the stairs. A few minutes later, before anyone notices that I haven't returned, KABOOM!

For those asking why this hasn't happened--one reason is that al Qaida and its disciples are, frankly, lousy terrorists. As Stalin said, the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize. Bin Laden and his people prefer big, showy events, and those are necessarily widely spaced. The result: anger rather than terror. How long were Americans terrorized after 9/11? The answer will vary with the individual, but I suspect that a large majority of the people in the US passed from fear to anger in a week or two. The Quebec separatists, who used to put bombs in mailboxes, were much better at creating actual terror than al Qaida, because their attacks were frequent and random. Even in Iraq, where car bombs and suicide bombers are daily occurrences, they don't seem to have changed minds--except perhaps to make the Shi'ites more intransigent against their former Sunni overlords--nor prevent life from being something like normal for many, probably most, Iraqis. Of course, the truth is that terrorism NEVER wins unless it is aided and abetted by the authority against which it is directed. The greatest failure of the Bush administration--and there are so many, many to choose from--may well be its obtuse ignorance of that fact.

So, to get back to our struggle against those who want to hurt us, it's been clear for years that the Bush administration is as incompetent in this area as in most others. Chemical plants remain tempting targets. Cargo containers are still not effectively screened, and the NY Times reported yesterday that the Coast Guard is giving a head's up to some shipping lines before their ships are searched--a notice that could give bad actors the chance to cover their tracks. Josh Marshall of talkingpointsmemo pointed to the GreenLane Maritime Cargo Security Act. Take a look--it seems like at least a good beginning.

No comments: