In a few days it will be the sixth anniversary of 9/11, and it's worth asking the question: why hasn't there been another major terrorist strike? Why haven't the Islamic radicals at least made a second serious attempt to cause the kind of damage, or worse, than the attacks of September 11, 2001 inflicted on America?
One answer--which we can expect from Bush diehards--is that the Bush administration has installed a foolproof system of terrorist detection. This theory does not convince.
This leads to a second explanation: the radical Muslims are so weak and disorganized that they can no longer pull off an effective action. This theory has adherents both on the right and the left. On the right, we hear the theory that "we've obviously taken the battle over there, and so they are unable to do harm over here." Even if there is some truth to this, it doesn't explain why every Muslim radical must head for Iraq: surely Al Qaeda could spare a few to bring the war to the headquarters of the Great Satan. Some on the left are drawn to the theory of an impotent Al Qaeda because they are looking for any excuse to get out of Iraq and, truth be told, they would like to forget about the whole War on Terror and go back to the way things were on September 10, 2001.
I'd like to suggest a different theory for why we haven't had more attempted 9/11s. Imagine if there had been more attacks. In that case Americans would have little doubt why we were fighting in Iraq. There would be no question over why this country had dispatched more than 100,000 troops to the Middle East. As in World War II, the only sentiment for ending the war would be on the part of those calling on Bush to level the countries sponsoring Islamic radicalism so that the place could be rebuilt from the ground up, as with Germany and Japan. In sum, more 9/11s would have the effect of rousing the present-oriented, slow-to-anger American dragon.
Instead, we are six years away from that catastrophic event, and already Americans are growing forgetful and impatient. Somehow, for many people 9/11 has become a freakish, surreal, one-time disaster that was surely tragic but whose recurrence doesn't seem to be a clear and present danger. So are the Islamic radicals holding back and waiting for American restlessness to produce a withdrawal from Iraq? Are the bad guys biding their time in the hopes that American lassitude will create new opportunities for them to strike even more savagely and with greater impunity in the future? How else to account for the uneasy calm that has hovered over this country for the past six years?
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 17)
16. I travel for living and other countries are not so carefull as Americans. But I know the real world that most americans don't, cause they are enclosed here watching Oprah every day and letting their brains being washed by a woman that, with such a power openly hates America, loves Africa, but hates America is the only explanation for such remarks again this country. Americans dont be fooled, think and analize.Sadam Hussein had his opportunity to show some love for his people but his chose his ego instead and when a country is tied by an international treaty it must comply with it. Anyway irakies has been killing themselves for centuries Americans are trying to establish some order but that is a task that takes too many years, cause it's imperative to educate their minds to freedom of religion and ideas and speech. Very hard task when people whose are trying get beheaded.
alfred at 9:15AM on Sep 6th 2007
17. Why attack us? It is counterproductive.
9-11 turned out to be a strategic mistake for Al Qaeda. It ended up disrupting their safe haven in Afghanistan. Additionally, when one examines the success some from the Middle East achieve from welfare, medicaid, mortgage and credit card fraud and then the money goes overseas, it seems likely that much of the funding for worldwide jihad still comes from here. It took the FBI at least 11 years (based on court testimony) to bring the Holy Land Foundation to trial. I am sure it does not take that long to set up such an operation. If that is as responsive as we can be, they really don't need to actually attack us.
Jim K at 9:18AM on Sep 6th 2007
18. D'Souza's a lazy thinker. He oversimplifies. It's both enticing and easy to think that every "they" do is a reaction to every thing "we" do and vice versa. That's a nice simple rational approach. Everyone is a rationale actor, even schizophrenics.
Here, D'Souza is on the right track. Remember: The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. The next was eight (8) years later.
farmboy15 at 9:20AM on Sep 6th 2007
19. as Pascual said . The Government controls all the materials to make bombs. Tons and tons of horse manure comes out of our government everyday it seems. Thats a joke , son!I can go to the store and get bomb fixins right now.(remember OK city). I also hope our government is pro Muslum and also pro Christian and pro Jewish and on and on. Here is a reality. Open boarders mean no security. I am pro immigration but if a farmer from southern Mexico crossing with his family to get some of the American dream can get in easily then a well trained terrorist sure can. Illusians of security.
Shoud have finished in Afhganistan. Where our enemies were. That said. Our troops did well for their assignment in Iraq. Time to come home. Controlled war is not like a football game. There will never be clear winners. It's not cut and run. It's just our time on the playing field is over.I support our troops because they are good at what they do. The problem is our leaders are not.
Barry at 9:25AM on Sep 6th 2007
20. Iraq is a different ryme and reason from the war on terror. The Iraq war opened a whole new ground for terrorist to grow which is why we are fighting Al Queda there now, not the same ones that we are supposed to be fighting. We attacked Al Queda in Pak and Afgan instans which broke them up. Our mistake was difusing the attacks until we found bush's old business partner and friend, Osama bin Laden (Bush calls him (Osamie). A warning of another attack is when we see Cheney going into a bunker and our securty forces are told to stand down. I know in my heart and guts they had a hand in bringing down the twin towers. For years many of the top echelon tied to these two men wanted to demolish the buildings.
People are more aware and security in airports our now what they are supposed to be, mostly. We were just sleeping because we were at peace. European nations are now alert and catching suspected terrorist before they are able to carry out attackes, just like what happened in Germany.
The credit belongs to everyone. We are more alert. However I think the "friendship" with certain countries like Saudi Arabia has us to be naive and holds keys as to the real reason as to why and how we were attacked on that horrible day.
David McCool at 9:31AM on Sep 6th 2007
21. Bush's legacy is that, for all his shock and awe, he is weak and ineffective on terrorism. We should've gone in and blasted OBL and everyone near him to smithereens. That is exactly what a true red-blooded military leader, rather than a sheltered businessman, would have done. Instead, we let OBL go, allowed him to continue to broadcast his hateful message to the present day, and we went off to fight in another country, for other reasons. Because America did not act with clarity and strength when it needed to, we are still bogged down in two simultaneous wars, with no end in sight for either. Someone will have to fix this mess, someone not on the businessman's payroll. Bush was, is, and most likely will always be, a weak and incompetent leader. That is the best spin I can put on it.
best,
mw
mikey1 at 9:38AM on Sep 6th 2007
22. to Manny...
My goodness man, you are a blast! You try to lecture us (by the way, try to find another term for liberals, pinko-commies is so 80's) that this IMMORAL and ILLEGAL invasion of a virtually defenseless country was not about the oil. What do you offer as proof of this, whith your infinite wisdom? Because we pay so much for it. Brilliant, but of the mark. The oil giants wanted to control the FLOW of oil, not the price. What company (who is quite literally a cartel or monopoly) would want to put out a cheap and affordable product if there is no competition? Tell me Manny? The US (and most of the criminals that run the administration) wanted to go to Iraq to (1) seize the oil fields (2) establish bases (3) prop up a puppet regime that would tow the line. In order to do this, they lied to the world and their country, fired and silenced people who tried to get the truth out, participated in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, THE DEATH OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, not to mention, almost 4,000 of their own citizens. For what? So that defense and "security" contracters (close to the Vice President) would rape the treasury and send the nation into abyssimal debt. All the while the reputation of the US would go down the toilet across the world. Good job, those must be REAL and PATRIOTIC americans in Manny's tiny mind.
Please Manny, try to read a little and stop calling people "pinko-commies", traitors, unpatriotic and sissies. I'm sure you're a real tough guy, but your reasonning and posts are pathetic and devoid of maturity.
Take care,
JS
JS at 10:48AM on Sep 6th 2007
23. I would also add that it is becoming so mind-bogglingly silly, this pointing toward a lack of major terrorist attacks as a sign of success in Iraq. Yes, Dinesh, it is quite clear that you have no other positives, and so have to construct one.
Actually, 9/11 did only happen once. No other president ever had to face a similar attack, and we will never know how they would've behaved if they had. That's about all you can say about attacks at home. What we see is only how Bush behaved, and that, in the world's opinion (including USA), has not been viewed positively. The real debate (not these simplistic exercises in blame) continues on how to measure benchmarks in Iraq; most assessments so far are not at all positive. Hopefully that will change some day.
best,
mw
michael white at 9:59AM on Sep 6th 2007
24. Conspiracy alert!!! The reason there haven't been, and likely won't be another attack is because of the lack of total success of the plot. Sure, Larry got his insurance payoff from wrecking his two towering white elephants, money was (stolen), documents destroyed that would reveal to the American people the depth of our Gov't manipulation, etc. Iraqi oil? What a bust!!! Don't you find it interesting that the best the 'evil-doers' could do prior to 9-11 was a flatulent truck-bomb, and a Zodiac filled with explosives and retards that believed what a mullah told them about paradise? London? Madrid? Poor attempts to divert our attention away from the truth (which we may never know). Now we have destroyed any credibility we have in the world, simply in a pathetic attempt to keep the military-industrial complex fat and happy. Dinesh- put down the pipe, it makes you ramble. Were you going to offer any real answers, or just ask vacuous fear-inducing questions? Oh, sorry, rhetorical question.
Robo Rob at 10:25AM on Sep 6th 2007
25. I am sick of people saying that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Any instrument can be a weapon: gas chambers, jetliners, etc. What makes them into WMD's is the evil will to use them that way. Sadam was the weapon of mass destruction in Iraq. We found him there and ridded the world of him. That was the message to those who support terrorism. It IS working. Unfortunately, the short memories and instant gratification mentalities of many in our country are pressuring our leaders to abort this strategy. We need to have the maturity, strength and responsibility not to leave Iraq in a shambles. If we lack the will to see our strategy all the way through, we will lose any support we have from the international community (which will remember only the problems we left behind) and we will be marking ourselves as an easy target for terrorists, once again.
F. Poulin at 10:32AM on Sep 6th 2007
26. Dinesh... do you really define the world by the borders of the U.S.A.? What about the terrorist attacks in Britain last year? The recent plot in Canada? The plot in Germany that was on the news just yesterday. The Islamic extremists have not relaxed... or perhaps, like so many Americans, you feel that the lives of others are of no consequence?
Richard at 10:35AM on Sep 6th 2007
27. the question is not "why no more attacks?" but rather "why 9/11 ever happend in the first place?" Bush was sleeping at the wheel planning a war on Iraq instead. Yes folks, the Iraq war was indeed planned before 9/11 and that is a FACT! Remember, Bush was installed in Oval office 7 whole months prior to the 9/11 attack. If you can blame 9/11 on Clinton then Clinton can easily blame the 1993 attack on daddy Bush and round and round we go!
Robb at 10:51AM on Sep 6th 2007
28. Be careful what you ask for because you might just get it! I believe the reason we have not suffered another 9-11 is because "We the People" have been on alert and watching this government like a hawk. To understand why 9-11 happened in the first place would take a scathing review of the role that our government played in the historic attack. I can hear the groans and cries that I'm being "unpatriotic", but the truth begins with a strong self analysis. Our government failed to respond on 9-11. What was the attack? Basically a small group of "Double-agents" were allowed to unleash their hostility on a nation asleep and unprotected. They were permitted to move freely and we did little to prevent their success. We knew about their motives, we knew they were planning something, we even protected the President and had him in his bunker. The day Bush came out of hiding, they attacked. What did Bush do...he kept on reading. Can American citizens repel our own planes? Who were the first individuals allowed to fly after the attack? Where did the Anthrax originate? A self analysis would tell us much. Where would the next attack originate? It won't be planes, but could it be in the trucks allowed to travel from Mexico? We are rushing to start a new program instead of demanding security. Congress is shoving it down our throats for what good or ill? We have not had another 9-11 because in our vigilance they lacked the means. The failure to secure our borders post 9-11 is unquestionably an act of treason; but what was the Anthrax and reading that book? Be careful what you ask for. American citizens can't defend this nation against foreign trucks with unknown cargo. Finally, look at the "Broken Arrow" incident that just happened with nukes. We can't stop the desire for evil people to kill us, but we can motivate the good people to try and save more of us. Vote for Democrats if you want the truth.
Cecil Jones at 10:55AM on Sep 6th 2007
29. Manny, I had not realized President Clinton had been religiously promoted to status of 'God'.
You mention Clinton, unecessarily promoting a war in Yugoslavia. Maybe you forgot that he did this a certain varying amount of degree from NATO, not as Bush did when he had us invade Iraq. Hvae you forgotten Bosnia-Hergovina? Maybe you supported the Serbs murdering, torturing and raping Crat women and children, also men. So it was not God ( your word ) Clinton that was the one and only responsible to stop the Ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia.
What is this the 50's, all of you GOP, Repub's referring to Democrats as ' Commie, Pinko's ', you all forgot REDS. McCarthy would be SOOOOOO proud!
Lowender, I am sure you have read Orwell's ' Animal Farm '? They are probably tapping our business and home phones because my husband and daughter are Muslim and since we have a summer home in Turkey, visiting frequently, I guess since no subpoenas are required any longer you may be next for any reason they choose
I will always support our men and women in the military, it is not their fault they are being murdered daily by a war we have no business being involved in. They are doing their job.
Pascal, ALL Muslim's are not, though US paranoia says to the contrary, Islamic Fanatics, Jihadists, terrorists are also out to kill all the 'INFIDELS',
Alan, How did you learn to impersonaye Bush ( or is it a neo-con ) so well? LOL! (:
Well put and to the point lacking hysteria, I hope it was you, " The Towers were attacked 8 yrs prior to 9/11 ", Barry.
We just need to come home NOW!!!
rhodalee at 10:51AM on Sep 6th 2007
30. Mikey 1, thanks for your post, you are absolutely right.
randy at 11:05AM on Sep 6th 2007