Our Fears of Terrorism Are Overblown

Americans are afraid. Terrorism, coupled with the buzz phrase "weapons of mass destruction", has struck a cord that has gotten people thinking, if not talking. The bottom line is people do not want to be scared the way they were on September 11^th. That is why it might come off as insane to state that our fears are unfounded.

Most of the bewilderment and anxiety with regards to world affairs can be chocked up to sensational journalism, fear mongering, and an overall lack of knowledge (and perspective) of all things remotely military. Gut instincts are not always right and perspective is hard to keep when buildings are smoldering.

Terrorism is a tactic used by an enemy to achieve an end. Simply put, if one is not afraid, "their" goal is thwarted. However, not all fear is unfounded. Fear is part of living in a real world, and there are things out there that deserve some fear. Terrorism is not such a fear. Terrorism by its very nature requires a lack of perspective in order for it to be successful. Terrorism is working when it generates a level of fear that is disproportional to a given threat. Some threats warrant concern, or even fear, but anytime a fear outpaces reality then perspective has been lost.

Knowing this is especially important given the current times. There are plenty of things to be afraid of, but most of these fears are visceral not logical. Compare the number of people in the world to the number of people killed in terrorist attacks in the last year. Far more people die in auto accidents every year.

Better yet, take a closer look at the phrase "weapons of mass destruction". What does this mean? WMD's include biological, chemical, nuclear, and thermonuclear weapons. They are like the name says, weapons that can kill en mass.

Biological weapons have only been used a few times throughout history. Documented uses of biological weapons are not common. In addition, the effects of these of weapons are hard to measure. It is reported that Mongol and Turkish forces would fling diseased bodies over the walls of their enemies. It is also reported that the British gave blankets infected with small pox to the Lenape Indians during Pontiac's War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_weapons). These kinds of weapons are difficult to use tactically and have enjoyed little military effectiveness.

Chemical weapons have been used more frequently and with better results. However, both chemical and biological weapons are highly unpredictable. Weather, topography, and a whole host of other factors greatly determine the effectiveness of these kinds of weapons. To be effective, they must be used against a concentrated group that cannot easily escape.

Nuclear and thermonuclear weapons are obviously more deadly, but they are also much more difficult to obtain. Delivery systems are crucial with these types of weapons in order to achieve the maximum effect. Effective delivery systems are about as difficult and as expensive to obtain as the weapons themselves.

This is where American military planners have a huge advantage over their opponents: they think in terms of systems. It takes thousands of people with various types of skills and equipment to deliver just one piece of ordinance. It literally takes an army (pun intended) of maintainers, intelligence gatherers, pilots, etc. to drop one bomb.

Terrorists and rogue states know they cannot effectively wage a war of attrition so they choose to wage a war of fear - a war of terror. The doomsday scenario of a terrorist group detonating a nuclear bomb on US soil brings together the worst of American fears. It puts together the words "nuclear" and the words "terrorist" in the same sentence. People remember the fear they during the Cold War combined with the (seemingly) newer fear of religious zealots waging a Holy War against the USA. Bare in mind, the U.S.S.R. had weapons systems the terrorists do not have. The former Soviet Union could wage a war of attrition; the terrorists can only conduct isolated acts of violence.

What if a rogue state, like Iran, obtains nuclear capabilities? What then? Even if a nation, like Iran, were to obtain nuclear weapons they will only possess a few of them.

Nukes are costly to make. The weapon systems necessary to deliver them are just as costly to obtain (if not more so). That is why only a few nations pose a serious nuclear threat. The USA helped create this giant fear of nuclear weapons by being the only nation to use them against an enemy. People were wowed by the destruction those two bombs wrought. Few people realize that the incendiary bomb campaign that the USA carried out against Japan (prior to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima) killed more people than did both of those mammoth explosions. A bunch of firebombs weighing only a few pounds killed more people than the sum total of the Manhattan Project.

Good-old-fashioned bullets have been killing far more people than bizarre, terrorist acts or nuclear blasts. There was a time in Sudan, just a few years ago, where people were dying at the rate of about 3,000 per week. That is a 9/11 every week! How mush press did that get? Those people died from bullets, stabbings, fire, etc. There was no elaborate plan to deliver some nerve gas, or some enormous bomb that took a team of scientists years to build. Just a bunch of people with conventional weapons managed to accomplish all the fatalities there. However, this is not as scary as a bunch of Marines who hold San Francisco hostage via several stolen rockets loaded with a fictional neurotoxin (thank you the feature film The Rock).

Terrorists kill in grand fashion because if it were not in grand fashion then people would not be as shocked. Rogue states and terrorists are in a battle for hearts and minds. They cannot win a war of material or attrition so they try to alter political views through acts of violence. It does work from time to time. However, the question to you the reader is "Are they right?" If "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" (Winston Churchill), then "are you afraid?" If you are still not convinced, and you still give yourself permission to be afraid, then take comfort in the fact that you are more likely to be murdered by someone you know than by a terrorist.