BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:39 PM

"There's such as thing as being right too early"

No there's not, Strick. That's a cop out of the highest order. Clinton recognised the threat in '96... he said so almost verbatim to the way I have written it above.
This line... "You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity" was me quoting you, remember.
I don't blame Clinton for not recognising the quantum leap.... for the simple reason that he did recognise the quantum leap.

What argument are you defending here? That 9/11 could have been prevented, but 'what the hell, people make mistakes'?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:34 PM

in 1994 Algerian terrorists hijacked a french airliner and threatened to crash it into the Eiffel tower. However they werent trained as pilots and could only try to force the pilot to do their bidding, which of course would not work as any pilot would do their best to avoid crashing into buildings.
(eventually french commandos stormed the plane on the ground and killed most of the terrorists)

There was a hijacking incident in Africa in the 90s where an insane man attempted to crash the airliner - the pilot and copilot eventually overcame him but it was close.

the suicide bombing concept came out of Lebanon in the early 80s devised by the Hizbollah as a tactic against Israeli and US targets.

so to put all of these elements together should not have been that difficult - the US has terror think tanks whose job it is to come up with scenarios and work through various responses.


a terror analyst in Vancouver very accurately predicted the idea of using hijacked airliners as missiles before 911, he was even investigated by the CIA afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:30 PM

"Wiping out" just wasn't an option then, and it isn't really an option now. Containment, prevention, and above al, avoiding actions thta make it easier to recruit people, those are the strategies that make sense.   The idea that somehow there is a simple solution "kill Bin Laden", or something like that, is a fantasy.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:29 PM

During the period we're discussing, only if the Clinton administration made a fabulous leap of logic it's not fair to expect from them. Worse, if they really had taken after Al Qaeda before their true danger was fully realized, the world, US and Arab would probably seen it as an attack on Islam, not self defense. It would have been much, much harder for Clinton to make a case for the what he would have needed to do both domestically and abroad. Who would have supported invading Afghanistan in 1994? There's such as thing as being right too early.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:23 PM

In other words, 9/11 could have been avoided...

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:19 PM

"You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity?
He was the one, who in 1996 said that Al Qaeda was the biggest significant threat of our generation.
And then when he did do anything, he was wagging the dog..."

Sorry my point hasn't been clear, Jim. The Clinton administration was confused as to how to deal with Al Qaeda. When treating them like a criminal organization like the Baader-Meinhof Gang didn't work, they tried treating them like terrorist nations. The attacks on Al Qaeda were meant to be retaliatory, not wipe them out. Pin pricks that accomplished very little anyway, particularly given Al Qaeda was warned by senior leaders in Pakistan prior to the attacks. All it did was motivate Ben Laden to order more direct attacks on the US. That wasn't the desired result was it? That's clearly not the way to handle them.

That's the reason the US moved from a policy of containment to one of desctruction in 2001. It just didn't get implemented in time and we were still effectively using the policy from the Clinton years.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 12:24 PM

The one thing that made September 11th possible was that the passengers and crews of the planes weren't thinking in terms of the planes being used as missiles.Hi-jacking for them, as for the rest of us, meant being diverted to some strange airport, and maybe the planes might get destroyed after the passengers had disembarked.

In those circumstances, sitting tight and keeping quiet was only the rational thing to do.

Since September 11th, it is impossible for the same scenario to be played out. There will be more atrocities, but never again quite that one.

If the authorities had any reason to think that this new twist on hi-jacking was on the cards, and they failed to let the rest of us know that, that would have been grossly irresponsible, and would have been a major factor in the disaster. And that is the question that needs to be settled.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 11:37 AM

Get real. Terrorism doesn't require massive organizations, and can't be fought effectively by attacking such organizations. WMDs are scary as hell, but not at all necessary for terrorism--9/11 was accomplished with box cutters; Oklahoma City with fertilizer.

I cartainly don't advocate a policy of International appeasement, but one might stop to consider that unilaterally interfering with other nations--no matter how foul their government is--is not apt to lead to friendly responses by the interfered-with citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 11:11 AM

well, isn't hindsight a marvelous thing!

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Pied Piper
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:49 AM

Of cause 9/11 could have been prevented,
if
the US had not funded Al Qaeda
the US had not ignored all the UN resolutions against Israel
the US had not supported the economy of Israel
the US had tried to find a solution for the people who's land was stolen by Zionists.
The US made this bed and now we all have to lie in it.
Thank you Uncle Sam.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:46 AM

Shooting suspected planes down, I think, Amos.

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:38 AM

You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity?
He was the one, who in 1996 said that Al Qaeda was the biggest significant threat of our generation.
And then when he did do anything, he was wagging the dog...

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:33 AM

Amos, the difference is that lobing a few crusie missles at them only made Al Qaeda mad. Our previous experience with state sponsored terrorism taught us that you could discourage them if you hit something they valued (in Kaddafi's case, by targeting him).

You do have to have a place to train and base operations, but all dem militia bases in da Southern US proves you don't have to have the nation's cooperation to keep them running.

GUEST, I'll bite, please explain The Final Option as it is meant in the UK. The implications are obvious, but...

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:31 AM

What does that mean, Nameless One?

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:28 AM

9-11 set new rules of engagement and levels of force internationally.
If terrorism will kill non combatants by turning them into weapons, you can be sure it will be stopped in advance now....The Final Option as it is known in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:26 AM

I think Al Qaeda changed the scale of terrorist acts. I have no idea how large their association is. I am certain they needed a nation's support somewhere to field the operation, whether Afghanistan or Pakistan.

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:25 AM

"Maybe 9/11 could have been prevented in the way that 9/11 could have been prevented, Strick. Has that ever occurred to you?"

No, just someone who spent several years studing history being realistic. Maybe there is a silver bullet out there, I just don't think it's likely. It's all those conspiracy theories. Too often normal behavior and not anticipating a radical change at all levels is all you need for an explanation.

I'll be happy to read what they say, but any super human, they, should have known or they should have thought won't be sufficient to convince me. Hell, I don't "blame" Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity. I can imagine circumstances through which he could have worked it out and been more effective against them, but it's not surprising that he didn't. He did what seemed reasonable at the time based on experience up to that time.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:18 AM

"Pearl Harbor could have been prevented readily enough, by simply following the age-old policy that during negoitiations with a hostile nation the place of the fleet is at sea, location unknown. Instead, our mighty Pacific Fleet was all racked up in neat rows in a known harbor."

Fair enough, but putting fleets to sea for indefinite periods is ridiculously expensive and up to WWII, the US was notoriously cheap when it came to military spending. Remember the films of the first draftees training with wooden guns and shooting at "tanks" that were old cars with ply wood turrent attached? We'd been pushing Japan for over six months and no one expected them to attack Pearl, how long would they have had to stay out. Besides, all the dispatches were expecting trouble futher east closer to Japanese bases of operation, so no one in the chain of command even thought of that.

Amos, you don't think Al Qaeda changed the scale and nature of international terrorism? This isn't the Baader-Meinhof Gang we're talking about or even Libya.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:17 AM

What's this, Strick?
Damage limitation already?

Maybe 9/11 could have been prevented in the way that 9/11 could have been prevented, Strick. Has that ever occurred to you?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:09 AM

Pearl Harbor could have been prevented readily enough, by simply following the age-old policy that during negoitiations with a hostile nation the place of the fleet is at sea, location unknown. Instead, our mighty Pacific Fleet was all racked up in neat rows in a known harbor. It was not exactly a secret that the Japanese were in desperate straits.

Unfortunately you can't apply that to skyscrapers and terrorist cells. The rules of inter-state war (Cold or hot) go all to hell with distributed networks of underground enemies. This is not news.

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 09:53 AM

Forgive me for repeating my comments from other thread where you shared this.

Jim, I'll be interested in reading what the Commission says. Maybe it could have been prevented if Ben Laden had been killed or Al Qaeda had been hit harder earlier or if the intelligence services were more like they are in James Bond movies (sorry, trying to lighten the mood). Again, all I said is that Clarke admitted that all the things he recommended combined wouldn't have prevented 9/11.

That doesn't mean it couldn't have been prevented at all, though I suspect we'll discover that it could have been prevented in the same way that Pearl Harbor could have been prevented. If you knew the attack was possible and put up torpedo nets, if the handful of patrol planes had been sent in the right direction instead of ordered south by staff in Washington, if the people manning the new radar sets had properly interpreted their data, and so on. Before Pearl Harbor only a few people in the world believed you could sail aircraft carriers that far and use planes to attack with torpedoes in the shallow harbor. Unfortunately they were Japanese or Americans to low it the military pecking order to have much say. Top brass didn't believe it possible, and it wasn't by the old rules. The attack changed the world and made the new rules obvious in retrospect. In that case, the Top Brass were made scapegoats despite the fact that they were getting contradictory orders and information from all side, all the way up the chain of command. Being obvious in retrospect is very different from being obvious before the fact, of course, so eventually the Top Brass at Pearl were vindicated and the final responsibility shared.

Before 9/11 only a few people had considered using planes as missles...

Subject: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 09:37 AM

I heard this on the BBC 10 mins ago, that Thomas Kean, the 9/11 Commission's chairman has spoken to a BBC journalist, and taking into account all the evidence at their disposal, this is what he is quoted as saying as being the opinion of the Commission.

I have no links to provide; it's not on the BBC website, yet.

But you never know..., the BBC got it wrong once before, right?

Jim.