On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 08:59:31PM -0800, Tim May wrote:About the threat to Washington: I think it's relatively high. A nerve
gas attack on buildings or the Metro seems likely. (The Japanese AUM
cult had Sarin, but was inept. A more capable, military-trained
operative has had many months to get into D.C. and wait for the obvious
time to attack. And he need not even be a suicide bomber. A cannister
of VX with a reliable timer is child's play.
One big difference, it seems to me, is that the U.S. government was recently up against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that did not have the complete resources of a nation-state at their disposal (plus other factors, like sufficient uninterrupted time to prepare a second attack on U.S. soil after we began to target them post-911).
Yes, and various other Axis of Evil nations (DPRK, France, etc.) will understand the importance of "asymmetric warfare."
Frankly, throwing the U.S. economy into chaos _before_ an attack on one's country would seem to be the best strategy.
(And this kind of chaos need not be a decapitation attack on the Seat of Government. A disabling attack on agriculture--such as contaminating the meat supply with hoof and mouth or mad cow--or a psychological attack on consumerism--such as 5 suicide bombers hitting crowded shopping malls--would have a big effect. The destruction of a few dams would have similar effects, but, fortunately for us, they are apparently well-defended, i.e., they are _not_ soft targets.)
Having seen Vietnam (the war, not the country), and having seen today's media frenzies and rampant consumerism, I think American resolve will fold if 5000 deaths of Americans occur in Iraq. The 100 or so deaths of Americans in 1991 was tolerable, but anything approaching the multiple thousands will trigger a paroxysm of "Why are we there?" and "Congress never authorized this!" and "Bring our boys home" sentiments.
Chemical Ali probably understands this very well. (And the usual rhetoric about how if the U.S. is attacked with CBW it will respond by nuking Baghdad is silly. If even 10.000 U.S. soldiers are killed in a chemical attack, the U.S. will not nuke a city of 5 million. At least I doubt they will, despite the rhetoric. My hunch is that Chemical Ali thinks along the same lines.)
So, going for a kill of 5-15K Americans, early on, is possibly an Iraqi strategy. It would be my strategy, were I on their side.
Now we're up against a possibly enfeebled nation, but a nation nonetheless, with a leader who knows that his days are numbered so there's arguably little downside to plotting terrorism. Plus other Middle East nations that now might be inclined to lend covert aid if it's entirely deniable.
I'm not even a despot, and yet I often fantasize about methods to kill tens of thousands of the bad guys, even if I died in the process. So I can imagine the fantasies some of the guys who have been in power for many years may have.
I would of course agree with what many are saying, that Kim Jong Il is a much more serious threat--to some, though not necessarily to the U.S. (And yet South Korean students and others are spitting on U.S. soldiers, yammering about "U.S. out of Korea!," etc. I say we give them their wish. Ditto for Germany, Italy, and the rest of Europe.
This is why I hope the train wreck/clusterfuck in Iraq happens. Get our country out of the "world's cop" business.
I live in Adams Morgan in Washington, DC, which Mapquest tells me is
three miles north of the White House (because of one way streets) -- the
oh-so-brave denizens of 1600 have closed Pennyslvania Ave. It's
probably 1.5 miles directly.
It's hardly implausible to believe I might survive a 1 kiloton nuclear blast, about what the "Davy Crockett" U.S. nuke, at around 50 lbs, provided. It makes sense to think that Soviet suitcase nukes have a similar yield.
The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were closer to 12-23 kilotons,
according to one source (http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm), and
there supposedly was a 50 percent survival rate at 1/8 of a mile from
ground zero -- while the bomb went off above ground as opposed to on the
ground.
I had recollected that Adams Morgan was up near Rock Creek Park, near Kalorama, and thus is further than 1.5 miles as the crow flies.
A blast at that distance would probably not be good news, especially for a multi-story building.
But, yes, many would survive. U.S. soldiers were expected to dig shallow foxholes prior to detonation of just such nukes, intended to clear Soviet armor at the Fulda Gap in Germany.
I doubt any Iraqi could get a nuke close to the White House, though.
(BTW, one of the best treatments of this idea, of terrorists getting access to small nukes, is in a novel by the guy who later became the "Crypto Czar," David Aaron. Google or Amazon will have details. Probably years out of print. I haven't heard anything out of him in several years, so maybe the job was just a pro forma G-job or maybe he resigned, or whatever.)
I might gain an extra half-mile or so because it's more likely a terrorist would attack the White House from the east, west, or south as opposed to the north -- Pennsylvania Avenue is closed, and traffic on H St. (further north) will be stopped or severely scrutinized during any heightened alert status.
A nuke could better be used in other places, I think. Hitting the Pentagon would be a major symbolic step, and a few major highways pass nearby....I haven't heard about I-95 or other highways being closed.
A novel I read a few years ago is quite prescient: Osama Bin Laden sends a freighter into San Francisco harbor with a Russian suitcase nuke. Here's the blurb for "Joshua's Hammer," David Hagberg, August 2000 (first mass market June 2001...I must have read it soon after the paperback came out, as I remembered the novel when 911 happened):
"When a one-kiloton Russian nuclear demolitions bomb the size of a suitcase ends up in the hands of Saudi multimillionaire Osama bin Laden, the entire world sits up and takes notice. And when the United States launches an attack on the terrorist's base of operations in Afghanistan, killing his daughter, retaliation against America is inevitable."
Dean Ing, another technothriller novelist, had this telling comment on the back of the paperback (again, it came out months before 911):
"Not only do Hagberg's thrillers have the ring of truth, sometimes they become the truth."
The bio says that Hagberg, who also writes as "Sean Flannery," was an Air Force cryptographer and that he speaks at CIA functions.
I'll bet he got a couple of extra visitors after 911, and I'll bet that the Library Habits Awareness Office is interested in which citizen-units are checking out his books. (Just kidding, as librarians across the country are announcing that they will not voluntarily cooperate with the Feds in their Orwellian scheme. Of course, I support anyone who kills a librarian for narcing them out.)
...
That leaves just biological and chemical weapons, conventional explosives,
and dirty bombs.
If I were Declan, I'd get out of Dodge.
Well, I don't think I'll be living here the rest of my life -- DC is too tempting a target over the long term, as the U.S. empire spreads and its enemies grow accordingly.
Well, this was my point. Too much of a target. (And, having been born in the area, having lived there for part of the 50s and most of the 60s, a depressing imperial capital. The entire area is centered around the extraction of tribute from the provinces to spend on the imperial agenda. Even the smattering of high tech in places like Reston, Springfield, Chantilly, Bethesda, etc. is largely centered around the Machinery of Empire: telecommunications (and wiretapping), credit card processing, Internet switching centers (guess why), defense electronics, and government medical research.
Washington is Rome.
Probably the necessary place to be for a politech reporter. Of course, one can choose between living inside the city, close to the action and the parties and all, or living 20 miles outside the city and commuting in. (Having seen horrendous traffic on the Beltway a couple of years ago, this may be worse!)
But I wouldn't be surprised to see the next attack take place in a far more distributed manner. Imagine a dozen Iraqi/Al Qaeda sympathizers or agents making dirty bombs (or even conventional explosives) and leaving them in gift-wrapped boxes in shopping bags at American surburban shopping malls. They detonate simultaneously after 15 minutes or if they're moved or disturbed. The perp would have time to escape and could take steps to mask himself from the inevitable surveillance camera footage that would be broadcast by the FBI.
Yes, this would have a major effect on consumers and the "national psyche."
So would a truck or van loaded with barrels of gasoline driven at high speed into a crowded shopping center or other such location, incinerating hundreds of people. This would be a suicide attacks, but there appear to be no shortage of such volunteers.
The U.S. would soon become accustomed to living in the same state of seige and constant surveillance that Israel enjoys. And watch what Congress will do to preserve our freedoms by giving more power to the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.
Imagine that approach being escalated by radio-controlled or autonomous model helicopters or airplanes being sent from outside the Beltway to blast into the White House or the House and Senate office buildings. They'd be guided by GPS and carry only a modest payload, so might not accomplish much unless their targets are outside. No more Rose Garden press conferences after the first wave of the attack occurs, I'd wager.
This scenario, of using RC-controlled planes, was outlined in yet another novel, "The Cobra Event," by Richard Preston (the "Hot Zone" author who is also the brother of Lincoln Preston, who is also a novelist). This was reportedly the novel which Bill Clinton read and then got fired up about biological threats. (First thing he did was to have Monica get her mouth checked for disease.)
A readily-available RC-controlled plane could disperse biological agents easily. (Some research would be needed on aerosolizing, patterns, wind, etc. Much of this information has leaked out of Fort Dedrick over the past several decades.)
Yes, DC is not a good long-term place to live. It's too tempting a target.
I wrote a longer article on this issue a while back, on Schelling points and soft targets.
An open society like the U.S., with free travel and without an ever-present police force, should not be trying to be the world's cop, thus guaranteeing that we piss off at least _some_ people.
I'm convinced that if the U.S. were libertarian, even libertine, that many Muslims would think of us as corrupt...but I don't think much organized effort would be directed against us.
The approach we are now taking, with a mixture of libertinenness and military imperialism, is probably the worst one to take. We are still considered corrupt, even if our libertinenness is not true libertarianism, and yet we are throwing our weight around, destabilizing other countries, assassinating leaders, etc. Not suprising that the chickens come home to roost.
--Tim May
"That government is best which governs not at all." --Henry David Thoreau
