The Modes of ISIS’ Threat to US
Memorial to Nov. 2015 Paris attacks at French Embassy in Moscow
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons/Stolbovsky
Dartmouth College academics Steven Simon and Daniel Benjamin, writing the post Could Paris Happen Here? on the New York Times webpage, have expressed what I predict will become the standard Democratic Party point of view. They begin their hopeful declaration this way:
SURVEYING the aftermath of the terror attacks in Paris, most Americans probably feel despair, and a presentiment that it is only a matter of time before something similar happens here. Even as Americans have felt the pain of the French, they have worried, not surprisingly, considering 9/11, about whether their country is next.
But such anxiety is unwarranted. In fact, it’s a mistake to assume that America’s security from terrorism at home is comparable to Europe’s. For many reasons, the United States is a significantly safer place.
After reading this, I was dumbfounded! I could not believe such a flight from reality was possible. These two gentlemen continued their case by noting how several conditions in Europe conjoined to make any member of the European Union vulnerable to ISIS or other terrorist attack:
- The EU’s Schengen rules allow the easy crossing of internal international boundaries without serious border controls.
- The ease with which a terrorist could infiltrate from Syria, hidden among refugees.
- A “Euro-jihadist” infrastructure in place within Europe to supply weapons and other resources.
- European security agencies that lacked the resources to monitor possible terrorists.
Simon and Benjamin then make the mind-boggling claim that the United States does not have these problems, “at least not nearly to the degree that Europe does …”
The very first thing that occurred to me was the flood of illegal immigrants crossing our southern border (with more than a few crossing our northern border with Canada as well!). Let us assume that the TSA and airport security could catch all terrorists trying to enter the U.S. airports, a proposition that may not survive scrutiny. All ISIS would have to do is to buy airline tickets for operatives from European or Middle Eastern airports to destinations in Canada, Mexico, or some Central or South American country. They could then smuggle themselves across either the Canadian or Mexican borders, or hire drug dealers who do this for a living to do it for them. Then, supplied with sufficient U.S. currency by ISIS, they could buy virtually anything they needed on the open market. And who knows? There may well be an “American-jihadist” infrastructure in place to supply them as well. Over the years ISIS and other terrorist networks have had ample opportunity to smuggle in their people to set up such an infrastructure.
Once inside the U.S. ISIS operatives could easily cross inter-state borders without significant scrutiny, the exact analogue of the Schengen rule situation in Europe. Do the U.S. security agencies have enough resources to monitor possible threats within the U.S.? There are reasons to doubt, as you can see here and here and here. Only small numbers of infiltrated ISIS operatives would be needed to inflict a huge amount of damage, as we saw in the Paris attack.
We would be well-advised to disregard the siren song of Simon and Benjamin, especially if re-sung by the Obama administration.
A very different song is sung by Michael Morell, a former CIA director in a Time.com post. In it he writes,
I was an intelligence officer for 33 years. When intelligence officers write or brief, they start with the bottom line. Here it is: ISIS poses a major threat to the US and to US interests abroad and that threat is growing every day.
He notes that initially, the greatest probability of ISIS attack on the U.S. comes from “lone wolves” recruited by ISIS through the internet or by other means. Right now the FBI has more than 900 open investigations on possible lone-wolves.
Over time, however, he thinks ISIS attacks will become more sophisticated and direct, just like the attacks in Paris last week. More disturbingly, he claims “And, in something that should get everyone’s attention, ISIS has shown an interest in weapons of mass destruction.” Also attention-grabbing is his next paragraph.
“Over time” may be shorter than many think. The attack in Paris was the first manifestation of an effort that ISIS made to put together an attack capability in Europe—an effort that they began less than a year ago. The head of the UK’s domestic security agency recently warned that ISIS is planning mass casualty attacks in Britain. His concerns are well founded. We will not be far behind.
Yet another concern we should have is this: The longer ISIS continues to exist, the more time it has to inspire recruits from other countries, from the United States, Europe, as well as the Middle East. The more time we give it, the longer it has to solidify its positions and gain control of such countries as Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Algeria, Morocco, and many others. Also read this fascinating (and long) article by David Ignatius on the rise of ISIS. ISIS is not diminishing, the way President Obama claims. It is multiplying like a fast-growing cancer. We have run out of time to tolerate Obama’s wishful thinking.
Views: 1,835