War on terror

[La Rouge Beret]

How can the War on Terror be made worse, for example a successful terrorist attack utilising a weapon of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical or biological).

If this were to occur, how would an attack of this nature or attacks (s) have shaped the approach to the War on Terror.

 

[Dave Howery]

the question has come up on here before, and I've always thought the US response would be 'SF to the max"... basically, every Special Force trooper we have would be scouring Afghanistan and Pakistan for every AQ member they could find. Pakistan would bluntly be given the choice of 'cooperate, get your borders under control, and help in the hunt for AQ and OBL, or we'll just go in and do it on our own'. With an actual WMD being used on American soil, the rest of the world is going to be a bit stunned... and wary of our response...

 

[Dunning Kruger]

I'll go with a dirty bomb going off in the US. Said bomb is traced back to Pakistan's ISI, which they vehemently deny. Any number of ways it can go at that point.

 

[La Rouge Beret]

I'll go with a dirty bomb going off in the US. Said bomb is traced back to Pakistan's ISI, which they vehemently deny. Any number of ways it can go at that point.

Any thoughts on how this plays out?

I was also thinking of a dirty bomb attack on Russia. The question I also have in this scenario would the US be more accepting of extraordinary rendition and interrogation techniques?

 

[Torqumada]

How can the War on Terror be made worse, for example a successful terrorist attack utilising a weapon of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical or biological).

I think the argument can be made that ramming two modern airliners that are practically full of fuel into buildings that hold tens of thousands of people constitutes a weapon of mass destruction as well as terror.

Torqumada

 

[Pangur]

I'll go with a dirty bomb going off in the US. Said bomb is traced back to Pakistan's ISI, which they vehemently deny. Any number of ways it can go at that point.

There is far worse - dirty bomb in the Vatican on Christmas eve which will piss of far more than a similar attack in the US.

 

[The Kiat]

One policy would be to hold the country harboring the terrorist responsible for the actions of those within its borders. Not very many government would want those groups in their border when Uncle Sam comes gunning for them with the big stick.

 

[La Rouge Beret]

There is far worse - dirty bomb in the Vatican on Christmas eve which will piss of far more than a similar attack in the US.

Yeah that would be pretty devastating... particularly for a well loved Pope like John Paul II.