Quote:
Originally posted by Superbelt
That was pretty good,
Except for the holes in your story.
There are dead babies. Even the hardest fanatical militant muslim group would balk at killing their own children.
And the video of the wedding goes from beginning to death. That's pretty excessively elaborate for a cover story.
|
Ah, but their *goal* wasn't to kill babies, their goal was to provide a cover, and what better cover than a wedding with lots of innocent civilians, be they adult or child? They didn't *expect* to be attacked, and they didn't mean to kill those children. I expect that (if my scenario is true) it was an unfortunate side-effect of the attack, which just happens to be great propaganda material; also, I doubt the terrorists would have brought their *own* children there...
Not to mention the fact that by and large, fanatical militant muslims have shown that they have no problem whatsoever with sending their children into harm's way, for the "greater good". Why else would Palestinian kids be throwing rocks (and worse) at well-armed Israeli soldiers; soldiers that are going to shoot at anything that moves, if we are to believe the Palestinian propaganda... One would imagine that their parents would want to protect them from the evil soldiers!
Quote:
Originally posted by Sparhawk
That's probably the most well-thought out answer - but I'm not sure of the logic behind it. What I mean is, the original "casus belli" was US troops in Saudi Arabia, and while they were targetted there (Khobar Towers), the majority of terrorist attacks between the end of the first Gulf War and the second were not in Saudi Arabia, not even close. So I don't quite buy the "since it's easier to defend the home turf, we're going to ignore their home turf" argument.
And as long as our ports and borders continue to remain 99% porous, I'm going to continue to give this administration an "F" in homeland security.
|
Most attacks were in unstable, ill-policed countries, where the chance of direct success is highest. Saudi-Arabia has a relatively stable government, and the US troops there had lots of protection, making them unattractive targets. Also, "home turf" to Muslims is not comparable to what you see as home turf; it's pretty much the entire Muslim world - that's why Muslims world-wide are angry about attacks on Muslims in one small area, *any* small area.