Counterterrorism Expert Fears the Worst

Bruce Hoffman, terrorism advisor to the stars White House, senses that al Qaeda is continuing its move toward obtaining chemical, biological, or radiological materials for terrorism. He believes that, because al Qaeda is on the ropes, its leadership is getting desperate, as seen by its use of chlorine bombs in Iraq.

The most likely form of an unconventional attack was a radiological or "dirty" bomb, Mr Hoffman said. Such weapons could more accurately be described as "weapons of mass disruption", but they would have a devastating effect if successfully used, spreading panic, forcing people from homes and businesses in the affected area and undermining public confidence in governments and public authorities.

In a city like New York or Sydney, the economic impact would be immense, he said.

Mr Hoffman cited the recent use in Iraq of chlorine bombs, which burn the lungs of victims, as an example of al-Qaeda's intent to use unconventional weapons. Moreover, it illustrated the disproportionate effect such weapons can have.

"There are an endless number of truck bombs that have killed in the hundreds but look at the reaction of Iraqis [to chlorine bombs]. They are absolutely panicked," he said.

It absolutely amazes me that, more than five years after 9/11, counterterrorism experts still don't understand the limitations of terrorist use of CBRN hazards, and CBRN defense specialists still don't appreciate the motivations or agendas of terrorists, either with conventional weapons or CBRN hazards. Both sides myopically stare at the technical properties of the hazards and imagine large-scale use of military-scale NBC weapons rather than the much more available industrial hazards that are "disruptive" and not "destructive."

Hoffman has completely overplayed the threat of the chlorine VBIEDs. There's been maybe a dozen chlorine incidents, at least two of which didn't go off, and zero - ZERO - deaths caused by the chlorine gas. Although there have been hundreds of civilians exposed to the gas, resulting in hospitalizations, I don't think it's at all correct to say that these incidents have the Iraqi public "absolutely panicked." As a result, the effects are hardly "disproportionate" to other VBIEDs seen every week (like this one for instance).

As much as the counterterrorists would like to be able to explain terrorist ambitions for "WMDs" and as much as CBRN defense specialists would like to get some business through terrorist use CBRN hazards, they're both out of touch with reality. Terrorists are doing just fine using improvised industrial hazards and don't need to go to "rogue nations" with actual military NBC weapons and WMD technology. It's beyond stupid to try to use counterproliferation strategy (deterrence doctrine) against terrorists using small-scale, single use of chlorine, radioactive isotopes, and single-digit grams of anthrax.

The latest boogeyman by the "experts" is to talk about terrorists using biological weapons to cause a "campaign" of BW terrorist incidents due to the capability to grow biologicals from a single source. Maybe this is their justification for Project BioWatch and rigging detectors all over the country. These scenarios completely ignore the actual capability of terrorists to 1) manufacture or acquire amounts to create mass casualty incidents, 2) to organize and execute such a campaign, 3) motivation to set up an apocalyptic confrontation with a superpower, and 4) evade intelligence agencies and counterterrorism specialists while setting this up.

Other than that, yeah, I'm completely panicked.

Comments

[CKR]

Hey! Any publicity is good publicity. His income may be going down.

[Belphegor1527]

J,

Good points. It seems to me that the insurgents have stumbled upon a tactic that give much better 'bang for the buck' than chlorine bombs. The capture of those two soldiers has diverted thousands of U.S. and Iraqi soldiers from the 'Surge' for more than three weeks (how many soldiers were diverted by the chlorine bombs?). Now, I'm not advocating that we shouldn't be looking for captured soldiers but since their capture the media has been swamped with stories emphasizing the 'leave no soldier behind' theme. I think the insurgents are picking up on this and realizing that they can use deny us the initiative (at least tactically - I don't think we've had it strategically since we took Baghdad).

I think this obsession with terrorists with WMDs has more to do with institutions doing empire building and individuals trying to further their careers than actual threats.

[BGG]

Good post, I agree. I linked/commented here.

[NVH]

J., yeah you're right, and so is CKR, he's looking for the spotlight missed a few speaking gigs whatever, same way when a kid gets kidnapped, same talking heads, whose credentials just happen to fit the bill and makeup looks good on. BUT
you're #2 reason, able to organize and carry out, supports Bush's strategy from the get go of bringing the fight to their door and kicking it in, and keeping the fight in their house. Be careful, RAG might think you're supporting policies not to his liking. Pulling out of Iraq gives them #2 BACK and if they have that the rest fall into place quite nicely over the next 5-10 years our so, to do just what Hoffman advocates (b/c of course if ANYTHING happens it's going on his resume that he called it correct).

[J.]

Hey NVH, RAG will pull me back into line when I need it ;^) I will disagree with you on your point on #2, only because it's a BS argument that al Qaeda's going to take over Iraq. I think the many tribal leaders on both the Sunni and Shiite sides will have something to say about that - whenever we get out of their way to allow them to do it. Right now, our efforts are only giving the Iraqi politicians time to argue and dispute old history rather than get organized.

Nothing says that we can't strike terrorist groups where we see them getting ready to do bad things. We don't have to be IN Iraq to do that. Time for us to go, and the terrorists still won't have the ability to organize and execute a CB terrorism campaign.

[NVH]

J., a valid point that the congresspeople should hear about if the surge falls thru ( this hold steady shit just doesn't fly really, but I'm a patient man ). And you're right about the tribal rivalries, etc.. BUT someone will win out, and none of the tribal guys got the money that UBL and AQ have. And the LAST Thing I want is George f'in Clooney saying we have to get back into Iraq b/c of the genocide of the Sunni's or something. It's like this Darfur thing, yeah, I'll give you a dollar, but until Sudan has Nukes, f'em and let God sort it out, which he is apparently doing with gusto, and you're idea is working over there with minimal support from the US with the refugee aid etc...so with the full force of US military behind, you're idea of pinpoint strikes is valid. I just remember the 90's and we had those pinpoint strikes available then too, and Clinton was too much of a pussy b/c of some kind of agreement or pipeline investment, or some other bullshit political issue that stopped him from dropping the hammer and I believe giving up the initiative like that only leads us back down that path, and it ain't the short way, and in the long run, not the least bloodiest either if we get hit again a la 9-11

[Barry]

Anybody who believes that invading Iraq was a productive policy of 'bringing the fight to their door and kicking it in, and keeping the fight in their house' is just dumb.

[NVH]

is your first name Dave, Barry, b/c if it is your post is lacking the requisite humor I would be expecting. Nice comeback though, "just dumb" Can I ask how dumb, b/c you know if we're all stupid like you think Bush, the soldiers, airmen, Marines, and sailors over there, and I are, I just need to know how much--jeez, two days I had to wait for this comeback...give me something to chew on...