With all those security measures in place, and with all that military hardware in position around DC, it is probably one of the safest urban areas in the country right now... Given all those security measures, chances are that I am taking more risk than him right now.
Precedent. DC is a strategic target. You know, I'm rather surprised that an employee of the Dutch _Ministry of Defense_ would have difficulty with the concept of a 'strategic target',
I am familiar with the concept of "strategic target". I should point out though that I am a *civilian* employee, not a *military* employee, so I may not be completely familiar with every detail of every single military concept. I'm a network administrator; military strategy is not part of my job.
and suspect that you may be unsubtly trying to troll the Americans on this list again.
Your suspicion is unwarranted.
DC was targeted by Muslim terrorists before: the attack on the Pentagon, where John *works* (did it completely escape your notice that if he had been in another section of the building he works in he might have been killed that day?) and the failed terror plane attack that was allegedly heading for the White House. John is living and working in a severe-risk area of this country. He works in a building that would be a _direct strategic target_ during any armed conflict with this country.
He doesn't work at the Pentagon but at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The former is at 1 South Rotary Road in Arlington, VA, the latter is at 2 Massachusetts Ave., NE Washington DC.
Unlike the Pentagon, the BLS does not qualify as a strategic target.
And, you've already posted elsewhere that **nothing** can stop terrorist attacks.
I don't recall saying that *nothing* can stop terrorist attacks. I do however recall saying that you can never completely eradicate terrorism -- unless you're willing to annihialate the entire human race for it.
Heightened defenses will probably do nothing to stop a terror attack, and may not even stop a well-planned military one if it were fast enough.
That's something that can neither be proven nor disproven. If someone decides to NOT bomb a building because of the heightened defenses, you'll never know about it.
As soon as Iraqis start saying "Kill the Dutch Infidels", and burning your flags and leaders in effigy I'm sure you'll have something to worry about.
Since that doesn't seem to have happened yet, it seems infinitely more likely that your country isn't viewed as an important enough enemy of Iraq despite your support of the US.
Some people over here seem to be worried, though. After the Sept. 11 attacks we went on Alert State Alpha. That got upped to Bravo, then downed to Alpha a few months ago, and since yesterday 16:00 hours we're back on Alert State Bravo. For a country that isn't an important enough enemy, we're taking a hell of a lot of extra security measures.
BTW, it's quite possible that an attack will not be directed against The Netherlands itself but against American targets within our borders. American companies here have taken extra security measures, and we've stepped up the security around, among other locations, the embassies of the US and the UK.
Let's see. The Netherlands is supporting the US, which makes it a potential target. I am stationed at an Army base that is the largest one in the southern part of the country, and which is home to an entire brigade. Adjacent to the base[*] there is a dual-purpose air field: part of it is in use as a regional civilian airport (Eindhoven Airport), with flights to and from cities all over Europe, and part of it is in use as an Air Force base (Welschap Air Force Base, the largest of the three Air Force bases in the south), which functions as a hub for much of Dutch military transport (both road and air transports). It is currently also being used by the US military for their air transports of troops and equipment to the Middle East.
In a straight line, I only live a few kilometers from said locations. So, whether I am at work or at home, if the worst-case scenario happens (a nuclear attack), I'm history.
Oh, but Hussein doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, right? So you have nothing to worry about!
Er, I didn't say he *doesn't* have WMD's -- if I knew for sure, I would have a very close relation to Saddam Hussein, which might make for a very unpleasant conversation with Military Intelligence! What I have said is that despite the claims that he has WMD's, the evidence for it is sofar overwhelmingly lacking.
Jeroen "Make love, not war" van Baardwijk
_________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
