Forthcoming Attacks?

Al Qaeda, long ago, made a strategic decision not to attack Americans again in their homeland. But why? We know they hate us. The answer is that the war on terrorism is not really about terror attacks at all. Terror is only a tactic, albeit a very effective one. The purpose of Al Qaeda's attack on America, our allies and pro-Western Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia is to divide the Muslim world from the modern, secular world embodied by globalization.

Thus, if Richter is right, we should not expect an attack in the United States. Instead, we should expect one, or several, in Asia, Europe, Africa, or South America.

I myself see an attack on oil supplies as being most able to show that the modern, secular world embodied by globalization is, to use an old Chinese term, a `paper tiger'.

Because we are dependant on fossil fuels, because oil companies use their assets more efficiently, and because China and India are growing economically, we are vulnerable to a supply interruption.

Hence, if El Qaeda or its allies have the capabilities, I fear they will attack an oil pipeline or oil terminal. This is already being done in Iraq; I am thinking of targets outside the Moslem world: Russia, which is fighting Moslems in Chechnya, and western Africa, which few think about when they ask whether the US or its enemies will feel victorious in two generations' time.

Also, I expect an attack soon, because I think of assymetrical war that way. But as I argue below, this may be wrong.

As for an attack: both Russian and western Africa offer vulnerabilities. Russia has a large pipeline system and it has Chechens. Could a few Chechens transport themselves and explosive to an unguarded pipe? Angola and Nigeria have oil terminals. They are well guarded. But could enough guards be bamboozled into thinking an oncoming ship was a smuggler and not harmful to them? Could enough be bribed?

.... while Americans tend to think only of weeks and months, a campaign might involve attacks ... three or five years apart. Such a slow moving war might mean that the people who govern rich countries may fail to perceive [the] threat....

What if, over the next year or two, people in the United States perceive that no one outside of Iraq is attacking the US? Would not many Americans come to think that Al Qaeda and other people who are against the US are `paper tigers'?

The reason the Islamist terrorists have not attacked America again at home is that bin Laden believes that Al Qaeda is winning the war. ....

Victory [to the United States] will come only when Americans decide to target the hearts and minds of millions of aggrieved Muslims

Thus, from an Al Qaeda point of view the question arises, why attack now? Why not wait a few years and then attack outside the US? Would the US even perceive itself as attacked?