Twenty-one people have been arrested in Great Britain in what has to be the largest conspiracy to kill innocent people since 9/11. The plot to blow up “several aircraft” in mid-flight by mixing various components of liquid explosives together on the aircraft was thwarted by British authorities. Breitbart gives details:

British authorities said Thursday they had thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up several aircraft heading to the U.S. using explosives smuggled in carry-on luggage, averting what police described as “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.” Home Secretary John Reid said British police and government were confident the main suspects had been arrested.

Huge crowds formed at security barriers at London’s Heathrow airport as officials searching for explosives barred nearly every form of liquid outside of baby formula.

Officials raised security to its highest level in Britain — suggesting a terrorist attack might be imminent — and banned hand-carried luggage on all trans-Atlantic flights.

Reports said that they were possibly about to take a preliminary flight to be sure they could get the explosives on the airplane:

The plan involved airline passengers hiding masked explosives in carry-on luggage, the official said. “They were not yet sitting on an airplane,” but were very close to traveling, the official said, calling the plot “the real deal.”

Can you imagine the result if this plan had succeeded? There would probably have been more flights brought down than on 9/11. My local news station is reporting that the plan was to board flights bound for the U.S. and bring them down over our territory, thereby possibly killing even more people on the ground.

Calling our efforts against militant Islam a “War on Terror” is misleading. That’s like saying we’re declaring a “War on Guns” or a “War on Airplanes and Bombs”. Terrorism – like guns, airplanes, and bombs — is a tactic used to achieve a particular end. Terrorism has no ideology of its own; it is an ideology of those who would use it to achieve their goals.

In my opinion, calling it a “War on Terror” is simply a way to avoid saying “War Against Militant Islam”, which would be interpreted by (many) Muslims as a “War Against Islam”. It’s a way to desensitize us from thinking we’re committing war against someone. Rather, we’re fighting against something that we must defeat. The problem is, this thing lives in the mind of militant Islamists, and to defeat the thing, you have to defeat the people holding to the thing as an ideal.

The fact that this was discovered just prior to terrorists actually boarding the doomed flights proves that we can no longer plan on a defensive war. In a war fought defensively, you’re always attempting to thwart your enemy’s attacks. There is just simply no way to successfully defend against all attacks. Sooner or later, a planned attack will be successful.

We must turn this war into an offensive war. That means a declaration of war as the Constitution intended, not the ineffective way we’ve had of doing things since Korea. This means that we must define our enemy as a group of people (militant Islamists). The problem is that “militant Islamists” are found in many countries in which not all of the citizenry approve of or participate in their actions. Great Britain, France, Canada, and even the United States have played host to militant Islamists.

I would think that the best way to fight the war would be to target — perhaps through assassination — leaders of countries who advocate the use of terrorism as a means of advancing Islam. Iran, for instance, is known to have many citizens who oppose the current regime, and would be friendly to the west. Giving covert aid to these groups in their quest to bring about a better government for themselves would also serve as a valid tactic in the war.

Any nation wanting to put an end to terrorist tactics would also have to take steps to shut down mosques engaged in fomenting militant Islam. Within any given country, those Muslims who claim that theirs is a religion of peace could prove it by helping to identify those mullahs, madrassas, and mosques engaged in these practices. In many nations, including America, laws would most likely have to be passed to allow this to be done, and Constitutional violations would have to be avoided. However, in the words of former Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, “There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact.”

We need to be waging a “War on Militant Islam”, because waging a “War on Terror” might lead to the same end envisioned by Justice Jackson.

Others blogging this issue:

• Freedom Folks wonders where a basic piece of information is
• Ms. Underestimated has video
• Ace of Spades HQ has a well-rounded post

Technorati: War on Terror, terrorism, Militant Islam, Heathrow, liquid explosives

TD