last week they took our planes and our people and destroyed the WTC, symbol of our financial heart.

The planes cost no more than the price of a ticket. Weapons? 99 cents apiece. less if they used the five finger discount.

And two or more years before they enjoyed our way of life in this country.

So, when thinking of what the next target is, use the simplest rules.

In order to completely destroy the financial part of our country, the communications need to be severed. Where is the communications heart in this country? Not the WTC, because we managed quite well.

Basics are finance, communications, shipping, food, air, things like that.

Power plants will be harder for them to hit because we have them guarded more now than before. AA-guns may be next, but as mentioned, the odds of them using planes again is low because we have put security there.

What could someone do to disrupt communications? Hit Bellsouth in Atlanata? Or is it South Carolina?

shipping? where is the hub for shipping? Trainyards where they move cars around from train to train? Hubs where truckers take their trailers and trade with other truckers so they can stay in their own areas? Cargo ships? harbors?

Maybe they will just hit certain cities, but with what? the suitcase nukes? water contamination? air contamination? maybe target some large hospital complexes?

Dams? Anyone live in the basin area below a dam? Does anyone want to live in the basin area below a dam?

bridges? San Francisco's golden gate comes to mind almost first thing, huh? what about the arch over the Mississippi River in St. Louis? Lots of bridges everywhere. What would it be like if they managed to blow most all the bridges spanning the Mississippi?

We are a country of targets. Hit the right mix and it could be devestatingly awful for a while.

As to weapons, sure the use of suitcase nukes or bios would be bad, but what else could they use, specifically inexpensive? Homemade bombs? We saw them being made in 'Terminator' for example. We know the directions are on the net.

if they want to kill mass amounts of people, they have to hit where mass amounts of people are, and when they are most amassed, rush hour.

If they want to disrupt operations in this country, AND kill mass amounts of people, where? bridges full of commuters during rush hour? Subways? perhaps taking some part of the city with it?

How many cities actually have subways? We have an above ground train. so does Atlanta. San Fran's BART is a mix of above and below.

What if they have the wherewithall to cause an earthquake by planting the nukes on a fault? Indeed, hoover dam is a possibility as a devestating target. But for how big an area?

I think they are looking at possibles that will affect as much of the country as possible.

Anyone want to try and narrow down the possibles?

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Answers

1. The perpetrator(s) of the next incident is already in place. The first thing to remember is the terrorists were/have been in place for as much as five years. Maybe longer for some, we don't know.

2. The perpetrator(s) may not look Arabic and may have an American last name. He may have been born here. We have a friend who is the result of a Syrian father and an American mother. He looks kinda Italian or maybe Spanish. Now if he were the product of a Syrian mother and an American father, his last name would be Smith or something. But suppose he had a deprived childhood, where his father abandoned the family? You can connect the dots from there. Or it could be a screwed-up American.

3. The next incident will be of equal surprise (or damn close). You're right, they want the biggest bang for the buck.

What form will the next attack take? Possibly all water supplies are now being monitored on an almost constant basis, so even though water may be poisoned, people won't be drinking it. Not enough casualties. Biological or chemical? The experts keep saying that delivery to a large area is problematical. Again, insufficient casualties. We hope. Keep thinking.

Where will the next attack take place?. This, if course, is the question we'd all like answered. Again, they want the biggest bang for the buck. You're right, BF,
communications is a prime target. But we've seen, after winter storms or hurricanes, for example, that communications don't stay down for long. Perhaps if they could take out every cell tower and every telecom hub. Could they do that? That would still leave satellites and I doubt they could get at them--but not impossible, if they could get into the sat guidance facilities.
Shipping is another good one. But for how long would a hijacked ship sunk in a harbor or river mouth block traffic? If this is a target, far as I remember NY is the busiest port. Used to be New Orleans was 2nd but I think Houston has taken over.
Underground public transportation is a good possibility, and I wouldn't want to be commuting on a subway right now.
Energy. Maybe oil refineries. There could have been sleepers planted in oil refineries for some years and it would be relativly easy for them to have hidden the necessary explosives prior to heightened security.
Another country? As I've wondered on another post, maybe in Israel. They hate the US and Israel equally. I'll probably think of something else later. It seems to be a popular subject for my brain. What's left of it.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

Yep. Think "cheap" and "mass destruction." I'm with you on most points, Barefoot. Biologicals are inexpensive and don't require special training to spread. Even some common bacteria in the "right" place could cause a lot of hurt.

Having said that, I still think financial centers and support (internet, etc) are still prime targets. I'm honestly not worried about nukes at this point because they are more expensive and require more training to place correctly.

I also don't think that individual "common" citizens are targets (yet). It's the large groups, so, avoiding areas where large concentrations of people gather is worth considering. Remember Times Square at New Year's. Gatherings like that. Open-air local gatherings of residents are probably still okay. A terriorist gets more headlines injuring a group of people waiting for a train in NYC than one or two who are waiting for a bus up in Podunk, WA, although they might be considering a smaller target just for the fear factor.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

I was doing a lot of the same thinking. I wonder if the pres has a think tank of average people (not the educated idjits). Farmers and ranchers are extremely creative people, as are a lot of computer programmers and some of the hollywood types. Put those together and I bet they could get real creative as to how to take out targets and maybe come up with something that might help this country.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

At some point, when as many bodies as possible have been recovered, there will be a national day of commemoration or something, some sort of symbolic thing to give "closure." A couple of bombs/gas/guys with AK47s inside large cathedrals might appeal to the terrorists' sense of humor.

How many passengers does a big cruise ship hold? Just because they've used one once doesn't mean they won't again.

They might even go after the Empire State Building or the Statue of Liberty.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

They'll go after the winter Olympics in Salt Lake.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

When you think about it, there are so many lovely targets for them.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2001

I'll be doing my holiday shopping early this year, at small stores, not big malls. Or via the internet.

-- Anonymous, September 19, 2001