Freedom, Justice, and Economics

One justifiably prominent question as we approach the fifth anniversary of the 9/11/2001 attacks is: Why have there been no subsequent attacks on American soil? I propose a politically suicidal answer that may nevertheless have some merit: Al Qaeda and the other terrorists aren’t really such a big deal. They don’t have the skills, the determination, the incentives, or the resources to pose a particularly great threat.

This is an obviously controversial position. I cursorily propose eight reasons to take it seriously:

1. The 9/11 attacks did not make use of unconventional weapons.
2. Al Qaeda members and leaders were “surprised” that the 9/11/2001 plane-projectiles caused the collapse of the WTC towers.
3. The passengers of United Flight #93 demonstrated that hijackers would never again be able to use a plane as a projectile.
4. Al Qaeda financial resources, so far as they are publicly documented, amounted to only a few tens of millions of dollars per year prior to the 9/11/2001 attacks.
5. Subsequent attacks on the US would provide no benefit for Al Qaeda in its hypothesized efforts to topple the Saudi regime.
6. Radicalized Muslim communities are uncommon in the US.
7. Vulnerabilities abound in the US: it wouldn’t take much sophistication to pull off a major attack.
8. Whatever the size of the threat, domestic politicians have strong incentives to exaggerate it.

If, with the trillions of dollars the US has spent on homeland security and defense since 9/11/2001, further attacks hadn’t been “prevented,” I would have been surprised.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 
•