-
ObamaCare Rate Spikes Revealed
May 13, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Quick CISPA Survey
April 18, 2013 | 1 comment
-
To Each His Own Audience (…or Enemy)
March 29, 2013 | 11 comments
-
They Say They Want a Revolution
March 20, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Senate Access Shutdown
March 12, 2013 | 1 comment
The Spectacle Blog
I wanted to provide a cursory analysis of the most significant threats to American territorial security, national sovereignty and interests abroad, as evidenced by foreign state actors. The Cold War may be over, Osama bin Laden dead, and al-Qaeda weakened, vulnerable and displaced. However, we can all agree that threats remain, and must be identified, analyzed, and resolved.
These threats take on a variety of forms and function: global terror exists, simultaneously, beyond the grasp of legitimate government and as a proxy of that authority, through state-sponsorship abroad. Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons (CBRN) threaten American lives, both at home and abroad, and state actors aren’t the only one with their fingers on the trigger. Rather, there is a serious and legitimate concern surrounding rogue scientists and the potential that states are providing, or will provide, technological assistance to terrorist organizations. Moreover, financial crisis, narco-terror and deteriorating state solvency threatens lives around the world. Increasing interventionism will engender prompt reaction from a host of local, regional and national political actors. And as always, American interests will be targeted as the world’s hegemon and lonely superpower.
10. Russia
The Cold War is over, but Russia still maintains the largest arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the world. Some 4650 nuclear warheads are buoyed by an existing doctrine of “limited nuclear war” to protect pressures against Russia and her allies. The sheer scope of the illicit arms trade, in a country run by billionaire oligarchs and their political pawns is alarming. Regional conflagrations in South Ossetia and Abkhazia threaten NATO member states. Vladimir Putin, no friend of the United States, is set to return to the presidency next year, and will undoubtedly continue to confound American directives in the U.N. Russia will remain a troublemaker in international affairs, and the threat of military intervention in Ukraine and direct conflict in Georgia looms. Cold Peace remains chilling.
9. Sudan
Sudan’s threat to American interests is well known. The erstwhile home of Osama bin Laden and the site of a vicious embassy bombing, the US has been focused on Sudan since Clinton lobbed dozens of cruise missiles towards Khartoum, to ward off Lewinski headlines. The state recently split between the north and south, but the former remains on the U.S. government’s list of state sponsors of terror — a spot it has occupied since 1993. Despite recent coordination between the U.S. and Sudanese leadership, terrorists remain active in the country, and have proven their ability to harm American targets.
8. Iraq
American troops in Iraq are generally safer than they have been in years; however, they remain targets of Shi’a militia activity and Sunni terror tactics. Moreover, nearly a decade of Iraqi insurgency and jihad has shaped a new generation of terrorist leadership. The mission in Iraq has bred a deep resentment of American involvement in the Muslim world, and cultivated support for international terror syndicates and the global jihadists movement. Thus, as long as America is intent on maintaining a billion-dollar embassy compound and a protracted troop presence, conflict in Iraq will remain a cause célèbre and a transnational rallying cry.
7. Somalia
From the al-Shabab terror network — which merged with al-Qaeda in 2008 — to piracy on the high seas, the failed state of Somalia presents a clear and present danger to American security interests and international shipping commerce. Ethiopian forces invaded the “state” as recently as 2007 to disrupt the brutal orthodoxy of Islamic Courts government. Puntland and Somaliland demand international support for secessionist aspirations, while clan and militia fighting creeps over the borders into East African neighbors sovereign territory. High-profile pirate activities has already cost American lives, and experts agree that Somalia’s maturing “al-Qaeda in East Africa and the Horn” is actively seeking out Western targets…and membership. Recently, two New Jersey men were arrested at JFK airport for planning to travel to East Africa to join the terror network. Some 20 Somali-Americans have left Minnesota over the past several years to enlist. One of the groups leaders, Omar Hammami (who grew up in Alabama) declared his allegiance to bin Laden. Remember, many of these folks are U.S. passport holders. Alarming, to say the least…
6. Mexico
It’s strange to consider that a friendly, southern neighbor and popular vacation getaway could present a material threat to American national security. But the fact is that paramilitaries employed by powerful Mexican drug cartels are guilty of indiscriminate killings, political assassination, and, frequently, targeted beheadings of rivals, civilians, and government agents. Sorta sounds like Iraq a few years ago. The U.S. Justice Department announced in 2009 that Mexican gangs are the “biggest organized crime threat to the United States.” The violence has increased since that time. It now threatens to engulf Mexico’s fragile democracy. So far, 40,000 Mexicans have died in the militarization of conflict between the cartels and government forces. We’ve got a civil war on our border, and we’re hardly aware of it. Violence, corruption and narco-trafficking will increasingly impact Mexico’s neighbor to the North, who supplies the guns and consumes the drugs.
To be continued…
View all comments (31) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Reid Smith
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/09/29/top-ten-greatest-threats-to-am
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- What’s in a Name?
- A President Loses His Power
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
David W| 9.29.11 @ 3:13PM
I figured you would have the following in the list:
1) Obama's policies
2) MSM unwillingness to actually report on Obama's bad policies
3) Willingness of the left to ignore Obama's bad policies and the realities of the real world.
SpiralArchitect| 9.29.11 @ 7:20PM
Fret not, the list is not complete.
America should take the top honors for being largest threat the USA's sovernty .
Dave fernandez| 5.24.12 @ 2:14PM
I would have said Bush as well as Obama who bypass the constitution to pass laws that circumvent our rights and extend their authority past it's legal size. Obama supports are ok with this cause they want free shit and Bush supports were ok with it cause they wanted to feel free from terrorists. As for all the "threats" listed in the article, if they are a danger, it's because we ourselves have show to be a war mongering nation. Like George Carlin said, our hobby is bombing brown people.
Occam's Tool| 9.29.11 @ 4:39PM
Don't forget Ron Paul supporters:
"Federal agents charge Ashland man with targeting Pentagon, Capitol with aerial explosives
E-mail this article To: Invalid email address Add a personal message: Your e-mail: Invalid email address
Sending your articleYour article has been sent. E-mail| Print | Comments () 09/28/2011 9:20 PM
By Milton J. Valencia, Glen Johnson, and Martin Finucane, Globe Staff
Federal authorities today arrested and charged a 26-year-old Ashland man with plotting to damage the Pentagon and US Capitol with a remote-controlled aircraft filled with C-4 plastic explosives.
Rezwan Ferdaus, a US citizen, was also charged with attempting to provide material support and resources to a foreign terrorist organization, specifically to Al Qaeda, in order to carry out attacks on US soldiers stationed overseas, the US attorney’s office said in a statement.
He apppeared for an initial status hearing today in US District Court in Worcester. Prosecutors are seeking that he be detained without bail until his trial. A detention hearing will be held at 3 p.m. Monday.
“The conduct alleged today shows that Mr. Ferdaus had long planned to commit violent acts against our country,” US Attorney Carmen Ortiz said. “Thanks to the diligence of the FBI and our many other law enforcement partners, that plan was thwarted.”
She added, “I want the public to understand that Mr. Ferdaus’ conduct, as alleged in the complaint, is not reflective of a particular culture, community or religion. In addition to protecting our citizens from the threats and violence alleged today, we also have an obligation to protect members of every community, race, and religion against violence and other unlawful conduct.”
The statement said that the public was never in danger from the explosive devices, which were controlled by undercover FBI employees.
Ferdaus also was closely monitored as his alleged plot developed and undercover agents were in frequent contact with him.
Federal prosecutors said that Ferdaus, a Northeastern University graduate with a physics degree, began planning to commit violent “jihad” against the US in early 2010.
He allegedly obtained mobile phones and modified them to act as switches for improvised explosive devices, and provided them to FBI undercover agents, believing the devices would be used against US soldiers overseas. Prosecutors said that in a June 2011 meeting, he “appeared gratified” when he was told that one of his triggers had killed three US soldiers and injured four or five others in Iraq.
“That’s exactly what I wanted,” Ferdaus allegedly said. Ferdaus delivered more of the devices and was anxious each time to know if they had worked and how many Americans had been killed, prosecutors said in a statement.
In recorded conversations beginning in January, Ferdaus allegedly also told a cooperating witness that he planned to attack the Pentagon using aircraft similar to “small drone airplanes” laden with explosives and guided by GPS devices.
In April, he allegedly expanded his plans to include attacking the US Capitol. In May and June, he allegedly delivered two thumb drives to agents that contained detailed plans of his proposed attacks.
In May, he allegedly traveled to Washington, conducting surveillance and taking photos of targets, as well as his proposed launch site, East Potomac Park. He told an undercover agent after his Washington visit that he wanted to couple his “aerial assault” with an armed ground attack, involving six people with automatic firearms.
Between May and September, prosecutors said, he ordered and acquired materials for his plans, including a remote-controlled aircraft. He also received from undercover agents today “(what he believed to be) C-4 explosives, six fully-automatic AK-47 assault rifles (machine guns) and grenades,” prosecutors said in a statement. After he locked them into a storage unit in Framingham he had rented under an assumed name, he was arrested by federal agents.
“Although Ferdaus was presented with multiple opportunities to back out of his plan, including being told that his attack would likely kill women and children .... Ferdaus never wavered in his desire to carry out the attacks,” prosecutors said.
Richard DesLauriers, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Boston Division said, “Today’s arrest was the culmination of an investigation forged through strong relationships among various Massachusetts law enforcement agencies to detect, deter, and prevent terrorism.”
Glen Johnson and Martin Finucane of the Globe staff contributed to this report. "
Ron Paul is a big fan of "The Religion of Peace" and supports the Ground Zero Mosque. So are Clint and Jack in Wi.
Sean| 9.29.11 @ 5:44PM
Sorry that Ron Paul wants to end your welfare.
Ron Paul gets more donations from the military than any other Republican running.
Ron Paul is the politician most faithful to the Constitution.
Ron Paul is extremely strong on defense of this country.
Con Chef (NB) | 9.30.11 @ 11:03AM
Yeah. He's so "strong," he doesn't think that the Iranians getting a nuke is a threat. You isolationist neo liberal Ru Paulites are a hoot!
C Bowen | 9.29.11 @ 6:08PM
Good point, the FBI is a threat if they are going to recruit terrorists. OKC redux, as reported in the American Spectator.
Red Phillips | 9.29.11 @ 6:20PM
Occam, you are obsessed with Ron Paul. First of all, since I don't trust the government I don't necessarily concede that this new terror suspect wasn't entrapped or the charges cooked up in some way so as to justify continued fear of terrorism. But assuming the charges are true, how on earth does bombing far off countries have anything to do with stopping domestic terrorism? It makes domestic terrorism more likely.
Second, the fact that the author concedes that the threats aren't just "state actors" actually makes the case that the answer is not primarily military. The answer is immigration restriction and border control, intel and law enforcement. The Sudan? Really? What kind of air force does the Sudan have? What kind of navy? Ditto Somalia.
Occam's Tool| 9.29.11 @ 8:39PM
Yes. I am obsessed with defeating EVIL, Red.
ONE Nuke, properly air delivered, could destroy this country with an EMP. Do your reading. Therefore, any terror supporting state with sufficient organization might be able to cripple us badly. You are way too sanguine. So, as I've stated before, were the America Firsters before WWII.
Destroy the snakes in their nest. Be proactive. One does not let a cancer metastasize, one destroys it when it is small. Like I said, Ron Paul hasn't practiced Medicine for a while.
Red, while you seem decent, your arguments are enormously like Burton K Wheeler's---and just as deadly to our country's future.
I was a constituent of Ron Paul, Red. I despise that worthless bastard. I went to UTMB from 1984-1988.
Clint| 9.29.11 @ 10:12PM
Not From 1984 to 1988 You Weren't Dr. Ron Paul's Constituent.
He Left Congress At The End Of His 1984 Congressional Term & Didn't Serve As A Congressman Again Until 1997.
Get Your Lies Straight, Screwball Asshole Israel Firster Fanatic,Tool Job.
Clint| 9.29.11 @ 11:48PM
You Never Were Eligible To Vote In Dr.Ron Paul's District, Ya Phoney Israel Firster Propagandist.Tool Job.
" Occam's Tool| 9.29.11 @ 8:34PM
I spent EIGHT YEARS in Texas and couldn't get State residency because I was going to University and Medical School. I would vote for Perry against Obama, but he's dead wrong on this one."
Red Phillips | 9.30.11 @ 5:38PM
"Destroy the snakes in their nest. Be proactive. One does not let a cancer metastasize, one destroys it when it is small."
What is your plan Occam? Just kill ALL the Muslims?
Occam's Tool| 9.29.11 @ 8:43PM
Freighters, decrepit and old, with an appropriate nuclear weapon encased in lead could easily move into our ports, Red. Thanks to people like you, our defenses are poor.
Like I said, unlike Clint, you seem decent. But your views are dangerous. Who would think that a couple of guys could bring down two enormous towers armed with box cutters and rudimentary piloting skills? Huh? On September 10, 2001, if I had stated that, you would have thought me grotesquely wrong.
Sean| 9.29.11 @ 10:22PM
You make no sense with your arguments. Ron Paul is for defending our country. All your arguments have to do with immigration. Guess who supports unrestrained immigration from third world countries? same people constantly afraid of third world countries.
Guess where most of the terrorist on 9/11 came from? Here is a hint George Bush liked to hold the hand of their leader.
Con Chef (NB) | 9.30.11 @ 11:14AM
They make plenty of sense. And those "third world countries" are getting their arms from China & Russia. What you people know about military matters could fill a thimble.
Red Phillips | 9.30.11 @ 5:35PM
Con Chef, this is not about "military matters." No one is debating flanking maneuvers or missile ballistics or whatever. This is about what is the wisest foreign policy for America to pursue. But I’m a non-interventionist, and I was in the military. (Perhaps I am a non-interventionist because I was in the military.) Were you?
Clint| 9.29.11 @ 7:45PM
Wow !
You're An Increacingly Sociopathic Serial Slandering Liar, Israel Firster Maniac,Tool Job.
The SaddestThing, Is That You're An Insane Zany Crazy Government Shrink Allowed To Treat The Poor Patients.
God Help Those Poor Bastards.
Occam's Tool| 9.29.11 @ 8:40PM
One should really brush one's teeth and wash your face between Jihadist Johns, Clint.
Clint| 9.29.11 @ 9:59PM
You're One Sorry-Ass, Twisted, Bottom Of The Barrel Government Excuse For A Shrink.
See A Real Shrink, Head Case.
Con Chef (NB) | 9.30.11 @ 11:12AM
Why don't you hug a suicide bomber, you "Turner Diaries" reading web fingered meth head? Or are the pages all stuck together? You neo Chamberlains are a riot.
Sean| 9.29.11 @ 5:37PM
Number one is Republicans and Democrats that usurp our Constitution.
C Bowen | 9.29.11 @ 6:07PM
Iraq wasn't in the top 30 until the Soccer Moms and Neocons thought to invade and let people vote.
Ken (Old Texican)| 9.29.11 @ 6:19PM
Hey Reid.
Who are you writing to here? None of us have been on a trip to Mars for years. Do you just enjoy stating old news?
DO BETTER!
PattyMor| 9.29.11 @ 6:31PM
1. BHO
2. Bilderberg Group (George Soros), CFR,
3. U.N., Agenda 21 & Global Warming
4. Islamists on all continents
5. Foreign Entanglements
6. Massive Debt
All American American| 9.30.11 @ 9:00AM
What's an "islamist?" Do you think that by putting "-ist" on the end of "islam" you will somehow insulate yourself from the kook muslims who want to kill you?
Tell me something, even if we kill all of the "islamists" or better yet the "muslim extremists" but leave the ideology of islam untouched, how do we prevent more "islamists" from, uhhhh, what is it again? Oh yeah, "hijacking" islam and starting the war against the West all over again?
Eradicate islam or live in fear as dhimmis. We've chosen to live in fear as dhimmis. Truly sad, really.
Joe| 9.29.11 @ 11:08PM
Yo - where my rumplemitz at?
JimH| 9.30.11 @ 8:16AM
Is this list in ascending order of threat? I have a few candidates listed in no particular order. I assume also that to be a threat it is not necessary to wish us ill. I’m limiting my list to internal threats. Maybe we could have one of those top 10 discussions like on NFL network.
1. ABA
2. EPA
3. UFT
5. AARP
6. BATF
7. IRS
8. FEMA
9. Federal Reserve
10. DHS
11. Dept. of Education
12. 1199
Stefan Stackhouse| 9.30.11 @ 10:35AM
OK, let's take these one by one:
10 - Russia: As long as we maintain a robust and reliable strategic triad, we can deter them. This has worked for over a half century, no good reason why it still can't. Loose nukes falling into the wrong hands is a worry, but it is one we've been working on pretty effectively. That is one area where Putin's interests and ours actually coincide. As for Russia's European periphery, it actually would help for the US to wind up its NATO commitment and let the EU transform it into a purely Euro-alliance. It has been 2/3 of a century since the end of WWII, and two decades since the end of the "cold war". It has reached the point where they really are capable of taking care of themselves. We need to retrench, both in the budget and on the ground, and this is one good place to do so. If we're out of there, I suspect that the Russians are not going to feel all that threatend by a Euro-alliance, and thus will be inclined to keep their troublemaking around their periphery on a low-key basis.
9 - (North) Sudan: Let's get real - this is a dusty backwater in the middle of nowhere. Except for the modest amount of hydrocarbons that the Chinese are pumping on their behalf, their main export is gum Arabic and camels. Yes, we don't want to see a major terrorist training camp and operations center set up there. We have the remote sensing intel to discover such were it ever to be established, and we have subs with Tomahawks to take them out. Other than that, given our huge problems it really is more in our national interest to just ignore them.
8 - Iraq: It used to be a major concern until the contretemps of the last decade. Now it is yet another dusty backwater, though with rather more hydrocarbons (which once again the Chinese are lining up to pump). We've already poured way too much money and blood into that hell-hole. If we were to pull out entirely, that might be good for the Iranians, bad for the Kurds, and worrying for the Israelis and the Saudis. Boo-hoo. Somehow, I suspect that this isn't going to be quite the juicy plum for the Iranians that some people seem to think. I really feel sorry for the Kurds, but we can't fight their battles for them. The Israelis can take care of themselves. As for the Saudis, the issue here is really keeping the south shore of the gulf out of Iranian hands. There are ways we can do this without putting so many of our people at risk of being blown up by IEDs.
7 - Somalia: Yet another dusty backwater, much like Sudan yet without any exports at all. Leave them to fight it out among themselves to the last one standing. As for any terrorist centers, see my comments above. Pirates? We've been dealing with those since "the shores of Tripoli". We need to stop pussyfooting around. We've got the naval ordinance to just blow them out of the water. As for any survivors we pluck out of the water, we simply need to issue a few lengths of rope and make sure our ships have something that will do in place of the old yardarms. I see no reason why pirates today should be treated any differently than they have always been.
6 - Mexico: Now, at last, we are talking about some that is directly and seriously relevant to our national security. We need not worry about the Mexican army marching over the border, but that is about all we don't need to worry about. How many decades now have we been fretting about illegals crossing our border? How many decades now have we been fretting about drugs being shipped across the border? If you want to talk about something that is genuinely about our national security, then talk about securing our border. That is basic, that is what nations do before they start even thinking about doing anything else. We also should be worried that Mexico is turning into a narco-state and a failed state before our eyes. The reason why that should be our problem is that this isn't just another dusty backwater halfway around the world, this is our next-door neighbor. What happens there does impact us. I don't think that we can solve their problems for them, and I am highly sceptical about "nation building". Yet it does seem to me that if there is one place in the world where we do need to be taking an interest in their internal affairs and thinking about how we might be helpful, it is Mexico.
9thID| 9.30.11 @ 12:00PM
I too would put Ron Paul in the top 10, but only if I thought he had the slightest chance of getting the GOP nod. Fortunately, the electoral pendulum hasn't swung from Obama totalitarianism to Ron Paul anarchy. Even if Paul ran again as a Liber-tarian, he would take many more votes away from Obama than a true GOP conservative. Paul is even to the Left of Obama on social and national security issues and that is why he never gains any REAL traction. If it makes the Paulistas feel better, one might say Paul is so far right that he actually comes full circle left!
No matter how they try and spin it, Ron Paul is not a 10th Amendment constitutionalist, he is instead an Articles of Confederationalist. Ron Paul is the true Lord Of The Flies candidate...