Considering the population of each European Country, I fail to understand why security and surveillance is so hard for them. The European Union has failed because three quarters of the problems are due to open borders. Maybe we should lend them our NSA!!
6
We have a saying in Europe (maybe there is a similar one in the U.S) that is: Things only change once the child has fallen into the water well. What I wonder is - has the child fallen deep enough, landed hard enough for all European countries to cooperate seriously to encounter islamic terrorism? Or does it still take other terror attacs in Germany, the UK, Italy, Spain ....? Some countries may have better intelligence services than others but considering how easy it is to make a bomb and walk into into a train or subway station, bus or anywhere else the only right thing is to work together and to do whatever it takes to win this "war". All democracies in this world should unite but Europe does have a special challenge and obligation due to its geographical location and this is what our politicians have to recognize.
16
"There are two obvious holes in Europe’s security system" - let me add a third: Europe must participate as the world's policeman. That phrase is usually used in negation, as in "we can't be the world's policemen" to argue overseas efforts. Despite the tone - as if no one can police the world - and despite mistakes during the Bush administration, the US does in fact act as the world's police - we must - the alternatives are untenable (should we share policing with Putin or allow anarchy?). So Europe faces Syrian refuges - following on waves of refugees from elsewhere - and it wrestles with an naïve ideology that would welcome all comers weighed against the reality that it cannot welcome even the current limited number of refugees - it simply doesn't have the capacity. Yet, wallowing in self-absorbed "guilt" related to the mid-20th century, Europe does not act to resolve problems at their source. Europe must act in the world with more resolve and force instead of allowing the US to stand up mostly alone when military intervention is required - as in Syria and elsewhere. When it does maybe the waves of refugees will ebb. Instead they dither, dealing with symptoms while the cancers rages and the United States stands in for the entire civilized world. The US spends just less than 4% of GDP on military - Germany just over 1% - balancing that will help the US and help Germany and help the world - and maybe joint efforts will lead to better "policing."
15
Essentially, one is dealing with the near hopeless sclerotic Eurocracy of Brussels and the nationalistic tendencies of its member states to make it work at the lowest common denominator of efficiency and effectiveness, with little sense of priorities. We just learned they are gearing up a spat with Canada and the USA over visas, because we still insist on visa requirements for travelers from several EU member states that do not meet our visa free entry requirements. So the EU in retaliation is planning to require Canadian and American travelers to the EU as a whole to obtain visas for entering any of the EU member countries. I shudder to think of the bureaucratic mess they will develop to implement such a nonsensical policy and the negative impact it will have on their tourist industry. The fact that they are preoccupying themselves with this kind of foolishness when they have existential threats to deal with just shows how dysfunctional and counter-productive that set-up is. That is their real challenge: to get their priorities right and do the needful to implement them.
16
I think every nation should require VISAs for entry - I'll trade my convenience for safety in many cases and this is one of them. Until Europe gets serious about controlling their borders and ridding the continent of Islamo-fananticism they really can't be trusted.
9
Europe's urgent security challenge is entirely of their making, and entirely a function of their commitment to secularism, multiculturalism and rule by elites.
Secularism leads them towards a false belief that all religions are created equal, and should be accommodated. But Islam is different. Everyone knows this - it's as much a violent political ideology as it is a faith.
Their multiculturalism is what leads them to treat all migrant groups equally. So Christians who are being exterminated aren't given priority, because Europe is a Christian culture and all cultures are equal. But the Sunni who are fleeing Assad, the exact same Muslim supremacists who are liquidating Alawites and Christians, are given as much an open door as anyone else. In a world where all culture and cultural norms are relative, distinctions between Christian or Shia and Sunni Muslims are verboten, and Europe winds up with a high proportion of toxic immigrants.
Finally, many in Europe are opposed to this way of doing things, but the common people are politically disenfranchised. Laws against speech, news censorship, so called "hate crime" enforcement and the vilification by elites of the likes of UKIP, the National Front, the Swedish Democrats and others isn't actually the reaction to mid-20th century fascism that many think it is, but is rather an extension of the same principle. Europe is and always will be a monarchical, fascistic place that discounts the common people.
Secularism leads them towards a false belief that all religions are created equal, and should be accommodated. But Islam is different. Everyone knows this - it's as much a violent political ideology as it is a faith.
Their multiculturalism is what leads them to treat all migrant groups equally. So Christians who are being exterminated aren't given priority, because Europe is a Christian culture and all cultures are equal. But the Sunni who are fleeing Assad, the exact same Muslim supremacists who are liquidating Alawites and Christians, are given as much an open door as anyone else. In a world where all culture and cultural norms are relative, distinctions between Christian or Shia and Sunni Muslims are verboten, and Europe winds up with a high proportion of toxic immigrants.
Finally, many in Europe are opposed to this way of doing things, but the common people are politically disenfranchised. Laws against speech, news censorship, so called "hate crime" enforcement and the vilification by elites of the likes of UKIP, the National Front, the Swedish Democrats and others isn't actually the reaction to mid-20th century fascism that many think it is, but is rather an extension of the same principle. Europe is and always will be a monarchical, fascistic place that discounts the common people.
25
You push Europe to accept millions of refugees with no proof of identity from a place full of terrorists and then chastise them for not doing enough to protect themselves?
36
What cynical hypocrisy from the NYT Editorial Board.
After broadly attacking everyone who did not want the unvetted and unwanted illegal economic migrants into their countries, despite the calls of Ms. Merkel, it is apparent that a number of terrorists have slipped in. And those who called the situation dangerous to their host nations are unfortunately, only too right.
Stop blaming the police agencies for this. It is the NYT along with the mainstream media, elites and open borders people that allowed Ms. Merkel to start and allow the continuance of this madness.
There was NO reasonable discussion of the effects of the invasion of illegal economic migrants, who could not be vetted in this newspaper. Please don't insult your paying readers with this drivel. Read any of the comments on your support of the "refugees" months ago and you should have seen this coming. So should have the politicians in Europe. But now that things are substantially worse than anticipated you've found a convenient victim - the security forces.
Give me a break.
After broadly attacking everyone who did not want the unvetted and unwanted illegal economic migrants into their countries, despite the calls of Ms. Merkel, it is apparent that a number of terrorists have slipped in. And those who called the situation dangerous to their host nations are unfortunately, only too right.
Stop blaming the police agencies for this. It is the NYT along with the mainstream media, elites and open borders people that allowed Ms. Merkel to start and allow the continuance of this madness.
There was NO reasonable discussion of the effects of the invasion of illegal economic migrants, who could not be vetted in this newspaper. Please don't insult your paying readers with this drivel. Read any of the comments on your support of the "refugees" months ago and you should have seen this coming. So should have the politicians in Europe. But now that things are substantially worse than anticipated you've found a convenient victim - the security forces.
Give me a break.
23
What happened to GLADIO, they were efficient to Communists, they cannot be use against Islamic terrorists. I remember they do very sensational bombings too ( Bologna train station).
Send Gladio over the Islamic terrorist.
Don't tell me that you totally dismantle the GLADIO ( STAY BEHIND).
Send Gladio over the Islamic terrorist.
Don't tell me that you totally dismantle the GLADIO ( STAY BEHIND).
I move between Europe and the US every six weeks and the difference in attitude to these terror attacks is beyond description. Americans see cause for war; we want to act. Europeans, as I have observed it, mourn and move on, and focus on the bigger picture. I'm not sure how high the body count would have to climb to result in a different response.
I don't think the two populations are fundamentally so different. Without question part of the blame for American anxiety lays with our TV news. Many Europeans get their news from organizations that are perhaps in part state-supported (like the BBC) and in any case not comparably driven by ratings and advertising. Without the need to compete for viewers, their news networks are staid — boring — by comparison. It makes for tedious viewing but better, calmer citizens.
I don't think the two populations are fundamentally so different. Without question part of the blame for American anxiety lays with our TV news. Many Europeans get their news from organizations that are perhaps in part state-supported (like the BBC) and in any case not comparably driven by ratings and advertising. Without the need to compete for viewers, their news networks are staid — boring — by comparison. It makes for tedious viewing but better, calmer citizens.
12
Gillian, you seem to have been imbibing a particularly potent form of Euro-centric Cool Ade. You correctly point out the atrocious death statistics from American gun violence. But to equate this with Islamic terrorism in Europe is mixing apples with pomegranates. Our gun violence is related to street crime, drug dealing, domestic violence, accidents, etc. As horrible as those factors are they are not aimed at toppling our government or our way of life. ISIS and other terrorist groups aim to destroy Western civilization and for many reasons are focusing on Europe. Draw your own conclusions but just remember that your governments will be calling on America to come to your aid.
10
The sanctimonious, finger-wagging tone of this editorial is in lockstep with that of the Obama White House. Tut, tut, Europe! Just look at this mess you've made! It is as hypocritical as having the White House somehow blame David Cameron (and more quietly, Hillary) for the Libya debacle. David Cameron? Hillary? Isn't this the locked-down White House where nothing happens unless it's decided at the very top? And aren't we supposed to be the Most Powerful Democracy/Military in the World? By leading from behind, we screwed up Libya, and Syria, and Egypt, and Yemen, and Iraq (which we originally screwed up by invading it, and then incredibly, made it even worse by leaving it). With 9 months left to run on the Obama era the blame game has begun in earnest. We should instead look in the mirror, accept some responsibility for the massive tidal wave of refugees sweeping over Europe that we helped to create and contributed to this security debacle, and do more - a lot more - than preach.
14
I still cannot believe I was in Europe when this happened. It was the morning I was leaving Luxembourg to head to London. I was terrified but fortunately it was early enough that I was able to make it across The Channel. When we got to London, I expected a lot more thorough screening to enter the country considering what had happened earlier that morning in Brussels. We got by with pretty much the usual entry questions and that was it.
In Paris I recall seeing security guards, but not as many as I would have thought there'd be considering the circumstances. Pretty scary stuff as Europe seems so open and free.
In Paris I recall seeing security guards, but not as many as I would have thought there'd be considering the circumstances. Pretty scary stuff as Europe seems so open and free.
7
The decades of social-welfare state have weakened the resolve and the warrior-spirit of the Europeans, even if the continent remains a Tower of Babel of disjointed nation-states. In the course of history Europe collapsed many times under the invasions of the Huns, Visigoths, Arabs and (almost) Mongols, and it is time for those who call themselves Europeans to redefine their spirit and will to live.
8
One thing to keep in mind is that the attacks in Brussels and Paris probably happened because they were very softer targets than the US is at the moment. San Bernardino happened for similar reasons, a US citizen was marrying a foreigner who was easily able to get a visa, something that will probably not happen as easily again. The terrorists were able to exploit this US weakness, but only once.
Terrorism anywhere in the world accomplishes the terrorists' purposes. The news of it flashes around the world almost instantaneously and remains in the news, in one form or another for a very long time. We are still discussing 9/11 way more than a decade later, and it still effects our conduct. So, the terrorists strike where it is easiest to strike and try to do it as often and as sensationally as possible.
If Europe starts to get things in order and it becomes harder for terrorists to operate there, they will once again start to focus on the US as a target, which is probably the preferred target in any case. The difference will be that, when terrorist interest in attacking in the US rises to the point of action, the US will face a much tougher, smarter, and sophisticated terrorist who has learned from the experiences in Europe. We need to be aware of this and not become complacent or think we have a superior means of dealing with terrorism. We do not. We are just fortunate for the moment. But, it is coming, unless we destroy the root causes of terrorism.
Terrorism anywhere in the world accomplishes the terrorists' purposes. The news of it flashes around the world almost instantaneously and remains in the news, in one form or another for a very long time. We are still discussing 9/11 way more than a decade later, and it still effects our conduct. So, the terrorists strike where it is easiest to strike and try to do it as often and as sensationally as possible.
If Europe starts to get things in order and it becomes harder for terrorists to operate there, they will once again start to focus on the US as a target, which is probably the preferred target in any case. The difference will be that, when terrorist interest in attacking in the US rises to the point of action, the US will face a much tougher, smarter, and sophisticated terrorist who has learned from the experiences in Europe. We need to be aware of this and not become complacent or think we have a superior means of dealing with terrorism. We do not. We are just fortunate for the moment. But, it is coming, unless we destroy the root causes of terrorism.
6
It's all about preserving jobs -- which is why the dozens of separate security agencies in Brussels aren't about to merge let alone combine with other European agencies. We had the same kind of thing going on when Homeland Security and TSA wanted their own airport security employees (who would tend to vote Democrat) while congressional Republicans wanted private firms to do the job.
2
Security?
They are walking into cafes with guns and bombs.
There's no going back.
Open borders have one purpose: flood the market with workers so wages can plummet to subsistence levels and business leaders/campaign contributors can prosper.
Forget security.
They are walking into cafes with guns and bombs.
There's no going back.
Open borders have one purpose: flood the market with workers so wages can plummet to subsistence levels and business leaders/campaign contributors can prosper.
Forget security.
9
America's insistence on providing an umbrella of security to Europe is partly responsible for the ill state of that continent's security. The arrogance of American security personnel on European soil hasn't helped. (The CIA kidnapped people in Sweden and in Italy and whisked them away from local law enforcement.)
Unfortunately, human rights will suffer in Europe, another win for the terrorists. In America, we live with militarized police forces, with surveillance and intrusion, and with suspicion and groping since 9/11. Stop and frisk is but an extension of that mentality.
Unfortunately, human rights will suffer in Europe, another win for the terrorists. In America, we live with militarized police forces, with surveillance and intrusion, and with suspicion and groping since 9/11. Stop and frisk is but an extension of that mentality.
3
The NYT did not mention that one fix would be to restrict immigration. The editorial board is pro immigration but does not wish to admit that said immigration brings costs.
16
Agreed. But getting to NYT to say anything about restricting immigration would be impossible. The sea borders with Turkey should have been closed in October last year. The EU (and NATO) could have put up SOME kind of force to keep these boats from setting out. Turkey is/was practicing pure extortion. Let the people into your country and let them take boats over--then extort money from the EU to take them back. Disgusting. And the NYT editors excoriated the EU not doing enough. I think the EU should start to rethink some of the tactics used after 9-11. Extraordinary rendition? Yeah, everyone was against it five years after 9-11--but it worked.Take some of this scum like Khalid Zerkani, who sat in Molenbeeck and recruited these people, take those EU citizens returning from Syria with blood on their hands and let's see if the Cubans would accept some money to keep Gitmo open and stash these people there. They might need foreign currency. Europe would be glad to get rid of these people. I don't understand why EU citizens should be allowed to return to the EU after signing up and fighting for ISIS.
8
The US has lost the war on terror. Why would you want Europe to do the same?
If I want to fly on an airline in the USA, I get a strip search and government grope. If I want to take my kid to a football game, our bags are searched, metal detectors are in use, frisks happen. If I place a phone call or use the internet, everything I say/write is recorded by the NSA (it's not just metadata and yes, it's still going on today.) This is NOT the free society I grew up in.
Even if Europe were to do nothing different, you're still far safer in Europe than the USA. Terrorist attacks, even in 1980s London with the IRA, are still rare and cause minimal casualties. Contrast this to the number of fatal car accidents (many DUI), and violence in the USA. Within 2 miles of each of my homes, there has been a fatal shooting in the past year..and I live in reasonably nice areas.
Give me Europe. It's safer.
If I want to fly on an airline in the USA, I get a strip search and government grope. If I want to take my kid to a football game, our bags are searched, metal detectors are in use, frisks happen. If I place a phone call or use the internet, everything I say/write is recorded by the NSA (it's not just metadata and yes, it's still going on today.) This is NOT the free society I grew up in.
Even if Europe were to do nothing different, you're still far safer in Europe than the USA. Terrorist attacks, even in 1980s London with the IRA, are still rare and cause minimal casualties. Contrast this to the number of fatal car accidents (many DUI), and violence in the USA. Within 2 miles of each of my homes, there has been a fatal shooting in the past year..and I live in reasonably nice areas.
Give me Europe. It's safer.
7
Benjamin Franklin said "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".
The key words are 'essential' and 'little temporary' which are sometimes left out when using this quote. General Michael Hayden, former director of NSA and CIA discusses this in his book "Playing to the Edge". Our intelligence agencies are often accused of overstepping their mandate. However, the USA, as mentioned in the article has suffered from terrorism far less than the Europeans with their emphasis on civil liberties.
The key words are 'essential' and 'little temporary' which are sometimes left out when using this quote. General Michael Hayden, former director of NSA and CIA discusses this in his book "Playing to the Edge". Our intelligence agencies are often accused of overstepping their mandate. However, the USA, as mentioned in the article has suffered from terrorism far less than the Europeans with their emphasis on civil liberties.
1
"an investment of $650 billion in homeland security"
-- or a useless waste?
-- or a useless waste?
5
As duly and clearly noted by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission Report the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were the result of systemic ignorance and incompetence and a " lack of imagination". National security and defense are a necessary but limited response to a much deeper socioeconomic political ethnic sectarian problem arising from cynical corrupt American hypocrisy that betrays American values and harms American interests.
Bargaining alliances with autocratic tyrant dictators births, breeds and sustains more enemies than America can track and kill. Denial of divine natural equal certain unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness o people has been known to incite a revolution. Every kidnapping, torture, indefinite detention and drone strike is going thermonuclear. America is sowing the wind and will certainly reap the whirlwind blowback.
The Europeans marginalize the Arab and African Muslims in their nations in states akin to apartheid and Jim Crow. There is no military solution to a socioeconomic political educational ethnic sectarian civil war.
There is no Islamic State. And neither ISIS nor al Qaeda nor their affiliates are an existential threat to Europe or America. They are criminal thug "grasshoppers." They are not "giant" nation states worthy of war.
Bargaining alliances with autocratic tyrant dictators births, breeds and sustains more enemies than America can track and kill. Denial of divine natural equal certain unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness o people has been known to incite a revolution. Every kidnapping, torture, indefinite detention and drone strike is going thermonuclear. America is sowing the wind and will certainly reap the whirlwind blowback.
The Europeans marginalize the Arab and African Muslims in their nations in states akin to apartheid and Jim Crow. There is no military solution to a socioeconomic political educational ethnic sectarian civil war.
There is no Islamic State. And neither ISIS nor al Qaeda nor their affiliates are an existential threat to Europe or America. They are criminal thug "grasshoppers." They are not "giant" nation states worthy of war.
1
If Obama and Hillary have their way, we will end up with the same security issues. They havn't learned from europe's mistakes, but want to make them also our mistakes. The want to bring in thousands of undocumented Syrian refugees.
It seems that their narrow sightedness has lead us from on disaster to another with Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Russia, Iran, and Syria. After eight years of stubborn stupidity, why would we want eight more years of the same lies and deceptions?
It seems that their narrow sightedness has lead us from on disaster to another with Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Russia, Iran, and Syria. After eight years of stubborn stupidity, why would we want eight more years of the same lies and deceptions?
12
HOPE On the horizon? The CIA and FBI are reported to share information with countries in Europe. I hope that they reach out to each of the EU members' security operations to share knowledge about potential threats. The last time there was a big incident in Germany was during the Berlin Olympics. I wouldn't bet on terrorist rings being undetected there. My wife and I were returning home after a visit to France and Germany during the Pope's trip down the Rhine. We must have been put through 5 ofr 6 screenings in the airport for a departing flight! It was so repetitive that the security agents were apologetic. Another time in Vienna there were Serbs demonstrating in a plaza. There were units of armed police in riot gear with vehicles with their motors running and their beacons lit up blocking every entrance. Those demonstrators weren't going to be able to become disruptive. So the other countries in Europe could learn from Germany's model (the current influx of refugees notwithstanding). During a visit, we saw a man operating the ticket machine that was out of order so that people could pay their fees and get their cars smoothly. Being a suspicious American, I thought that he was a con artist trying to rip people off and keep the money. Also the EU has a great deal to learn about countering terrorism and monitoring suspects from Israel, which is always forthcoming with its technical know how and experience with allies, despite the animus it faces in the EU.
Having a centralized intelligence- gathering apparatus may be the answer, but only if all countries within the EU are willing to coordinate efforts. Will it take yet another terrorist attack to become serious about it? Lets hope not.
4
If Europe and the US would actually confront and defeat the supporters of radical, violent, Islamic jihad - specifically, Saudi Arabia and Iran - then the Molenbeeks would lose their pantheon of heroes and die forgotten deaths. When there is no Hero they want to emulate - when Iran, the only Islamic Republic to stand up to and defeat the "Great Satan", is itself shattered - then they will slink and slither back into the dirt where they came from.
11
I dread of the continuing trigger happy reaction to a threat coming from a group that thrives on overreaction. Daesh are juvenile and horrible, their worldview deeply limited and immature, and their ability to hurt is off the charts. But ... going in and ruining the neighborhood is a way to make enemies and help them recruit.
"America’s intervention will likely spark more terrorism against the United States, thus fueling demands for yet greater military action. After a period of relative restraint, the United States is heading back into the terror trap."
"the more America intensifies its war against ISIS, the more ISIS will try to strike Americans. And the more terrorism ISIS manages to carry out, the more fiercely America will escalate its air attacks, thus creating the civilian casualties that ... “tremendously help the narrative of a jihadi group like the Islamic State.” If the public reaction to Paris and the December attack in San Bernardino is any guide, continued jihadist terrorism will also lead to a rising demand for American ground troops. That ... would be the worst trap America could fall into, because ISIS wants to cast itself as the Islamic world’s defender against a new crusader invasion."
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/03/why-attacking-isis-w...
I work with Muslim caregivers, who are nonviolent and don't agree that their religion enables Jihad. Religious intolerance is a problem, but on the whole I agree.
"America’s intervention will likely spark more terrorism against the United States, thus fueling demands for yet greater military action. After a period of relative restraint, the United States is heading back into the terror trap."
"the more America intensifies its war against ISIS, the more ISIS will try to strike Americans. And the more terrorism ISIS manages to carry out, the more fiercely America will escalate its air attacks, thus creating the civilian casualties that ... “tremendously help the narrative of a jihadi group like the Islamic State.” If the public reaction to Paris and the December attack in San Bernardino is any guide, continued jihadist terrorism will also lead to a rising demand for American ground troops. That ... would be the worst trap America could fall into, because ISIS wants to cast itself as the Islamic world’s defender against a new crusader invasion."
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/03/why-attacking-isis-w...
I work with Muslim caregivers, who are nonviolent and don't agree that their religion enables Jihad. Religious intolerance is a problem, but on the whole I agree.
3
Would be nice if you could suggest what we SHOULD do, other than sit on our hands and smile winningly at the mass murderes when they come for us
BTW enough with the crusader thing. You do know, dont you, that Islam conquered a wholly Christian Middle East by force and exterminated those who would not convert? Fall of Constaninople ring a bell?
BTW enough with the crusader thing. You do know, dont you, that Islam conquered a wholly Christian Middle East by force and exterminated those who would not convert? Fall of Constaninople ring a bell?
8
Europeans do not even take regular crime-fighting seriously. One of the terrorists previously fired an automatic weapon at police officers during an armed robbery. He served a short sentence, and was let out on parole.
19
Yes and the homicide rate in Europe has always been a fraction of the USA's. Why? We dont allow idiots to own guns. You'll get around to it, after a hundred or a thousand more dead schoolkids
5
Suggesting precautions and ways to fight terrorism is all right. Also the suggestions about improved security measures, enforcement mechanism, border vigilance and intelligence sharing among the European countries are timely and need early implementation. But in all this, the missing part is refusing to accept the fact that terrorism is not the problem of Europe only, rather it's a global problem and needs an unreserved global response with well coordinated international effort at evolving a common counterterrorism strategy with enough flexibility as to be effectively adapted to the country specific needs. In short, terrorism is a global scourge and needs global cooperation to confront.
10
You are right, but the "really" missing part in your tirade is the qualifier "muslim" to the noun "terrorrism". No progress until we are able to name the problem.
7
The round up, internment, and extermination of six million Jews, aided by extensive German record keeping, still lives in the minds of many Europeans. Good for them.
5
We Americans want to expand our MIC exports to Europe to include our internal security mindset. Fortunately, the folks on my adopted continent have good memories. In Western Europe there was a centralized intelligence group from 1933 to 1945. In Central and Eastern Europe from 1917 to 1991. The Europeans remember well just how efficient and effective those intelligence groups were.
The problem with always looking for potential threats is that if you look hard enough, you'll always find them. We Americans have been looking very hard for a while. That leads to the Dick Cheney "logic" of a 1% threat being responded to as if it is a 100% certainty. That's how we got where we are now.
No thank you.
The problem with always looking for potential threats is that if you look hard enough, you'll always find them. We Americans have been looking very hard for a while. That leads to the Dick Cheney "logic" of a 1% threat being responded to as if it is a 100% certainty. That's how we got where we are now.
No thank you.
22
Nothing will become more secure in Europe and the world, no prevention measures will work effectively until islam reforms itself or better, subsides. It may still take some time, but everything comes to pass...
23
Destroying Iran and Saudi Arabia as the primary supporters of violent Islamic jihad will go a long way to defeating the violence and the bringers of violence to Europe and the US. Islam will never "subside" - no religion ever has.
3
"Islam" of itself is not the issue. The fanatics, who follow distorted versions of Islam, are the problem.
Islamaphobia merely serves to fuel the bigotry that paints all followers of Islam with the same brush, and thus alienate the more thoughtful and moderate Muslim.
Islamaphobia merely serves to fuel the bigotry that paints all followers of Islam with the same brush, and thus alienate the more thoughtful and moderate Muslim.
"Islamophobia" is fear that someone who is Islamic will kill you because you're not Islamic. Other religions seem to be rather benign lately, because we continue to hear reports of violent Islamic jihadists who:
- Blow up airports
- Blow up trains
- Shoot crowds of people at concerts
- Blow up buses
- Blow up airplanes
- Shoot employees at newspapers whose views disagree with them
- Rape women in the areas their guns control
- Kidnap girl children from schools and sell them into slavery
- Rape women in the countries they have migrated to
There aren't "distorted versions of Islam" - the Qu'ran says many things, as do the Hadiths. Mohammed married a 9 year old girl and consummated the marriage - this is documented historical fact, and serves as the basis for all kinds of Islamic sexual predation. Mohammad proclaimed to his followers that Jews should be killed if they do not convert - this is documented historical fact, and serves as the basis for all kinds of Islamic murder.
The "more thoughtful and moderate Muslims" are doing absolutely nothing to prevent any of this. Nothing. Anyone afraid of someone who believes Islam is truth has plenty of justification for this belief.
- Blow up airports
- Blow up trains
- Shoot crowds of people at concerts
- Blow up buses
- Blow up airplanes
- Shoot employees at newspapers whose views disagree with them
- Rape women in the areas their guns control
- Kidnap girl children from schools and sell them into slavery
- Rape women in the countries they have migrated to
There aren't "distorted versions of Islam" - the Qu'ran says many things, as do the Hadiths. Mohammed married a 9 year old girl and consummated the marriage - this is documented historical fact, and serves as the basis for all kinds of Islamic sexual predation. Mohammad proclaimed to his followers that Jews should be killed if they do not convert - this is documented historical fact, and serves as the basis for all kinds of Islamic murder.
The "more thoughtful and moderate Muslims" are doing absolutely nothing to prevent any of this. Nothing. Anyone afraid of someone who believes Islam is truth has plenty of justification for this belief.
10
Our 2 international borders are long and porous. Our true protection comes from our boundries with 2 of the worlld's greatest oceans.
Surprising the writers didn't include this fact
Surprising the writers didn't include this fact
29
Europe faces a substantially different problem than the US. Just imagine radicalized Hispanic terrorism to understand the difference (no intent to cast aspersions on Hispanics). Imagine thousands of Hispanic refugees leaving war zones in South and Central American, traveling across Mexico on foot, and entering the US with legitimate asylum claims. They would tend to settle in Hispanic communities.
Just how effective do you think we would be in locating a radicalized Hispanic terrorist cell in Phoenix, San Antonio or Los Angeles before it attacked?
Would our anti-terrorist law enforcement be able to stop terrorists from traveling from Dallas to St. Louis, or from Phoenix to Kansas City?
After a few attacks by radicalized Hispanic terrorists, how would we insure that the civil rights of Hispanic citizens be properly respected?
Could US anti-terrorism law enforcement be effective against radicalized Hispanic terrorists without the support of the Hispanic population? What steps would US anti-terrorism law enforcement take to gain and maintain the support of the Hispanic population?
The imaginary problem of radicalized Hispanic terrorists in the US is similar to the real threat of radicalized Islamists in Europe. Don't expect the Europeans to be more effective in fighting radicalized Islamists than you think the US would be in fighting imagined radicalized Hispanic terrorists.
Just how effective do you think we would be in locating a radicalized Hispanic terrorist cell in Phoenix, San Antonio or Los Angeles before it attacked?
Would our anti-terrorist law enforcement be able to stop terrorists from traveling from Dallas to St. Louis, or from Phoenix to Kansas City?
After a few attacks by radicalized Hispanic terrorists, how would we insure that the civil rights of Hispanic citizens be properly respected?
Could US anti-terrorism law enforcement be effective against radicalized Hispanic terrorists without the support of the Hispanic population? What steps would US anti-terrorism law enforcement take to gain and maintain the support of the Hispanic population?
The imaginary problem of radicalized Hispanic terrorists in the US is similar to the real threat of radicalized Islamists in Europe. Don't expect the Europeans to be more effective in fighting radicalized Islamists than you think the US would be in fighting imagined radicalized Hispanic terrorists.
67
The Reformed Church In America and the Presbyterian Church in the USA have run a cooperative missionary effort in Chiapas Mexico for almost 100 years. They worked primarily among the Chiapas tribe.
The RCA's members magazine reported a few years ago that Muslims had entered southern Mexico a few years before and converted a large number of the natives to Islam.
The fear that Hispanics would cross the border for terrorist projects isn't as remote a thought when you add Islamist indoctrination to the mix.
The RCA's members magazine reported a few years ago that Muslims had entered southern Mexico a few years before and converted a large number of the natives to Islam.
The fear that Hispanics would cross the border for terrorist projects isn't as remote a thought when you add Islamist indoctrination to the mix.
4
We are indeed fortunate that Hispanic does not equal Islamic.
2
You seem very certain that security is better in the States than in Europe, but you do not give any proof of that fact. What if a dirty bomb detonates in New-York harbor and Manhattan has to be evacuated for a few years? After all the worst act of terrorism was 9/11 and the US government did not appear very efficient at the time. The massive bureaucracies created since then are totally untested ,I hope they work ,but you cannot prove that they do.
35
It might be worth reminding people that 9/11 might not have happened if the Bush administration in its mighty ego didn't think they had anything to learn from the outgoing Clinton administration, which was wise to the problem.
Naive ego didn't help, did it. People who think they have nothing to learn are a danger to themselves and others.
It's quite likely that a continued Clinton administration would have prevented the attacks. There's plenty on the record about how the Bush people didn't want to hear it.
Naive ego didn't help, did it. People who think they have nothing to learn are a danger to themselves and others.
It's quite likely that a continued Clinton administration would have prevented the attacks. There's plenty on the record about how the Bush people didn't want to hear it.
4
Are you suggesting that people being able to self define their gender and subsequently getting official documents to that effect might be a less than great idea?
10
I'm amused by how frequently I see op-ed contributors expound on the weaknesses within Europe, decrying the Schengen Agreement as being only about a lack of border controls, while ignoring the travel and work benefits it has brought many European citizens.
To wit from today's opinion piece: "...but it is still worth noting that terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11 have claimed 45 lives while in Europe, the four largest attacks — in Madrid, London, Paris and Brussels — plus some smaller attacks have claimed nearly 10 times that number."
So I give you this data from the CDC by contrast: "In 2013, firearms were used in 84,258 nonfatal injuries (26.65 per 100,000 U.S. citizens) and 11,208 deaths by homicide (3.5 per 100,000), 21,175 by suicide with a firearm, 505 deaths due to accidental discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms-use with "undetermined intent" for a total of 33,169 deaths related to firearms.
It's time America woke up & acknowledged this home-grown source of death and disablement as the scourge that it is. If over 33,000 people were killed by terrorist attack, you'd damn well do something about it.
In Europe we largely live in peace, benefitting from the economic, cultural, language and work benefits of sharing an interconnected Visa-free area. Our airports are no more vulnerable than yours. Please stop this fear-mongering jingoism and look inward. And I say this as someone who loves the U.S.
To wit from today's opinion piece: "...but it is still worth noting that terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11 have claimed 45 lives while in Europe, the four largest attacks — in Madrid, London, Paris and Brussels — plus some smaller attacks have claimed nearly 10 times that number."
So I give you this data from the CDC by contrast: "In 2013, firearms were used in 84,258 nonfatal injuries (26.65 per 100,000 U.S. citizens) and 11,208 deaths by homicide (3.5 per 100,000), 21,175 by suicide with a firearm, 505 deaths due to accidental discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms-use with "undetermined intent" for a total of 33,169 deaths related to firearms.
It's time America woke up & acknowledged this home-grown source of death and disablement as the scourge that it is. If over 33,000 people were killed by terrorist attack, you'd damn well do something about it.
In Europe we largely live in peace, benefitting from the economic, cultural, language and work benefits of sharing an interconnected Visa-free area. Our airports are no more vulnerable than yours. Please stop this fear-mongering jingoism and look inward. And I say this as someone who loves the U.S.
76
Our founders wisely allowed that the people must have the ability to defend themselves in their homes and their person. Unlike Europe the American colonists were always well armed whereas Europe was denying weapons to the common people, even swords for at least the last 500 years. The monarchies and its vassals feared the people they'd been oppressing for a 1000 years. The first battle of the American Revolution was caused by colonists refusing to allow British troops to seize arms and gunpowder at Lexington Mass. The second amendment is called the First Freedom because without it none of the others can be defended.
It was the 13 colonies which demanded this right of the people to defend the states from the federal (covenant) government and it was a condition along with the other 9 amendments for ratification of the constitution. They defended this demand in the Federalist Paper #46.
Repealing or amending an amendment is not an easy task. It requires a yea vote from 2/3 of the Congress and 3/4 (38) of the states. Such agreement would be impossible for any of the first 10 amendments called The Bill Of Rights to be amended as they are the minimums for a society to call itself free.
It was the 13 colonies which demanded this right of the people to defend the states from the federal (covenant) government and it was a condition along with the other 9 amendments for ratification of the constitution. They defended this demand in the Federalist Paper #46.
Repealing or amending an amendment is not an easy task. It requires a yea vote from 2/3 of the Congress and 3/4 (38) of the states. Such agreement would be impossible for any of the first 10 amendments called The Bill Of Rights to be amended as they are the minimums for a society to call itself free.
3
This is a discussion that requires more than bumper sticker soundbites.
To begin, with the number of firearms in private hands here, simple "take guns away" approaches are hopelessly naive. The difficulty here is that the antis are often so ignorant of even the terminology concerning firearms that communication is a challenge and finding common ground is often impossible.
We have many deaths in this country that can be avoided. Not to be glib but abortion, withdrawal of support at end of life and highway fatalities are all things that can be prevented. We tend to get the vapors about firearms but, because it is PC, don't show the same concern about abortions. "But that is different" I hear the masses roar. And that is part of the problem too.
In any event, I love Scotland and wish you well.
To begin, with the number of firearms in private hands here, simple "take guns away" approaches are hopelessly naive. The difficulty here is that the antis are often so ignorant of even the terminology concerning firearms that communication is a challenge and finding common ground is often impossible.
We have many deaths in this country that can be avoided. Not to be glib but abortion, withdrawal of support at end of life and highway fatalities are all things that can be prevented. We tend to get the vapors about firearms but, because it is PC, don't show the same concern about abortions. "But that is different" I hear the masses roar. And that is part of the problem too.
In any event, I love Scotland and wish you well.
2
According to the Patient Safety America survey, 440,000 people in the U.S. die each year due to medical error, another 10,000 per day suffer severe complications from medical error, and the dollar cost of all this medical error is estimated at $1 Trillion annually. This looks like a much more serious problem to me.
You are honest to point out that 2/3 of firearm deaths are suicide and I would add that almost all of the homicides are committed in a small number of inner cities run by Democrats for decades, each with strong gun control laws.
You are honest to point out that 2/3 of firearm deaths are suicide and I would add that almost all of the homicides are committed in a small number of inner cities run by Democrats for decades, each with strong gun control laws.
4
Once you put in place "emergency" measures they tend to stay in place indefinitely and become part of the new normal. As evinced by this editorial singing the praises of policies put in place by George W Bush and which the New York Times roundly condemned at the time.
I agree that European security is deficient and that we have not taken the Jihadi threat seriously (people have been ringing the alarm bells about Belgium for years) but it is unrealistic to claim that you can have everything - total freedom and total security. The Left needs to be more coherent on these issues if it isn't going to lose all credibility - having a coherent position doesn't mean you can never change your mind but it does mean that the underlying values which lead you to change your mind should be clearly thought through and enunciated. And yes, this will mean having to make difficult choices.
I agree that European security is deficient and that we have not taken the Jihadi threat seriously (people have been ringing the alarm bells about Belgium for years) but it is unrealistic to claim that you can have everything - total freedom and total security. The Left needs to be more coherent on these issues if it isn't going to lose all credibility - having a coherent position doesn't mean you can never change your mind but it does mean that the underlying values which lead you to change your mind should be clearly thought through and enunciated. And yes, this will mean having to make difficult choices.
10
I am with you except for your oversimplification of "the Left". That's a vague categorization of a wide variety of people and in our current situation "lose all credibility" applies rather more to the candidates for president on the right.
One of the problems with being tolerant is that we cannot present a united front like those bent on the dangerous policies now in ascendance. I almost fell for the thing I was criticizing, by referring to them as "the Right".
My Republican friends have all left the party, or rather, it has left them.
One of the problems with being tolerant is that we cannot present a united front like those bent on the dangerous policies now in ascendance. I almost fell for the thing I was criticizing, by referring to them as "the Right".
My Republican friends have all left the party, or rather, it has left them.
1
It's absurd that the NYTimes editorial board opines on how Europe should get its act together on security, while at the same time the paper is a big and stubborn proponent of open borders and allowing 3rd world masses to invade both Europe and the United States.
When you have reasons to believe that someone may want to break into your home and attack you, shouldn't locking the doors and windows be the first thing on your mind, or should you just keep them wide open?
On both sides of the Atlantic resources needed to prevent terrorist attacks are not unlimited. Paying for a huge security apparatus shortchanges other important societal goals and needs. So isn't it logical to conclude that to increase security we must protect borders and drastically lower immigration from ethnic/religious groups that are known for producing terrorists.
During WW2, when the US was at war with Japan and Nazi Germany, would it have made any sense to allow hordes of Japanese and German migrants/refugees into the US? Like it or not, the Western world is now at war with radical Islam. It is foolish and irresponsible not to recognize this situation for what it is, and not to advocate and act accordingly.
When you have reasons to believe that someone may want to break into your home and attack you, shouldn't locking the doors and windows be the first thing on your mind, or should you just keep them wide open?
On both sides of the Atlantic resources needed to prevent terrorist attacks are not unlimited. Paying for a huge security apparatus shortchanges other important societal goals and needs. So isn't it logical to conclude that to increase security we must protect borders and drastically lower immigration from ethnic/religious groups that are known for producing terrorists.
During WW2, when the US was at war with Japan and Nazi Germany, would it have made any sense to allow hordes of Japanese and German migrants/refugees into the US? Like it or not, the Western world is now at war with radical Islam. It is foolish and irresponsible not to recognize this situation for what it is, and not to advocate and act accordingly.
60
Vitiated and morally bankrupt from having caused and then endured two world wars in the previous century, the nations of Europe are all but spent in many aspects. Their inability to cooperate in anything like an effective manner to combat terrorism underscores the fundamental weakness of their confederacy known as the European Union. The USA knows both from its founding Articles of Confederation, which so few now recall, and its infamous Civil War with the inception of the Southern Confederacy that this form of representative government is most flawed. Its individual members will always put their national interests first, and those of the confederacy second.
3
And David Cameron tells us we are safer in the EU. I think not.
13
The biggest difference between the terrorist threats to the United States and Europe is the numbers of the population supportive of terrorism. Which is greatly a function of immigrant populations. Our immigrant population is mostly from Hispanic countries in Latin America and do not show much propensity towards ideological terrorism, while Europe's immigrant population comes mostly from those societies that have large proportions favoring terrorism. Which would tend to result in producing more terrorists.
For instance, if polls show that, say 30% of the population of a particular country has a good opinion of al Qaeda or ISIS, it only stands to reason that a somewhat similar proportion of those coming to your country from there would have similar attitudes, even ignoring the factor that those groups would seek to deliberately send their adherents to infiltrate and attack you.
To which the common sense approach is, other than for certain common sense exceptions, not to accept immigrants from such societies. As bad as Europe's current terrorism problem may be, it can only be made far worse by opening its borders to let in millions more from the societies from whence the terrorists spring or find inspiration. Even if only 10% of those being let in support terrorism, by letting in 2 million people, you've just increased the terrorists' population base by 200,000. When you're in a hole, stop digging.
For instance, if polls show that, say 30% of the population of a particular country has a good opinion of al Qaeda or ISIS, it only stands to reason that a somewhat similar proportion of those coming to your country from there would have similar attitudes, even ignoring the factor that those groups would seek to deliberately send their adherents to infiltrate and attack you.
To which the common sense approach is, other than for certain common sense exceptions, not to accept immigrants from such societies. As bad as Europe's current terrorism problem may be, it can only be made far worse by opening its borders to let in millions more from the societies from whence the terrorists spring or find inspiration. Even if only 10% of those being let in support terrorism, by letting in 2 million people, you've just increased the terrorists' population base by 200,000. When you're in a hole, stop digging.
42
I am now on a tour of Europe, principally by train. I arrived via cruise ship in Italy, crossed by train through Austria to Germany, then by train from Germany to Belgium.
Not one official person has asked to see my passport, either on entry into Europe, or traveling from country to country (other than on a train to see if I had one, as is needed to use a Eurailpass). The only people who have asked to see it are hotel receptionists, who record the passport numbers of guests. And not even all of them have done so.
Not one official person has asked to see my passport, either on entry into Europe, or traveling from country to country (other than on a train to see if I had one, as is needed to use a Eurailpass). The only people who have asked to see it are hotel receptionists, who record the passport numbers of guests. And not even all of them have done so.
15
It's called Schengen. There are no border checks by design. It is a major achievement of the European Union and what we are most loathe to lose and what is now at riak. Entry into Europe is another thing.
15
I flew from NY to rome and walked off the plane onto a waiting train without a single encounter with an official person. Scary!
4
After briefly surveying some recent comments, I guess I'm one of the few that actually agrees with the points raised in this editorial.
I think Europe should convene a security summit to address its porous border situation and lack of coordinated intelligence communications. From what I've read, Belgium has been quite lax in monitoring threats from its ethnically polarized neighborhoods. The head in sand approach never works, as we have seen in recent works.
If the EU can get together economically, it needs to take the next step, and get on the same page on how to thwart terrorism in a region of disparate countries, languages, and cultures. The cat is out of the bag in terms of alienated Muslims lured to ISIS who are citizens in these various countries.
Unless there are common goals and tactics that can be pursued without further polarizing EU country citizens of different ethnic backgrounds, I fear we'll see more attacks which may or may not become linked to the broader terrorism goals of ISIS--which isn't going away any time soon.
I think Europe should convene a security summit to address its porous border situation and lack of coordinated intelligence communications. From what I've read, Belgium has been quite lax in monitoring threats from its ethnically polarized neighborhoods. The head in sand approach never works, as we have seen in recent works.
If the EU can get together economically, it needs to take the next step, and get on the same page on how to thwart terrorism in a region of disparate countries, languages, and cultures. The cat is out of the bag in terms of alienated Muslims lured to ISIS who are citizens in these various countries.
Unless there are common goals and tactics that can be pursued without further polarizing EU country citizens of different ethnic backgrounds, I fear we'll see more attacks which may or may not become linked to the broader terrorism goals of ISIS--which isn't going away any time soon.
21
A clear and concise recycling of the obvious and what we already know!
9
After researching the state of airport security in Europe and the US, I can say that travelers have a lot to fear in both places. Truly tight security is extremely expensive and most government's balk at the amount of technology and highly trained man/womanpower that is required to truly secure an airport. Until that changes I fear there will be more sad news.
12
Now as I remember it, Heathrow was full of heavily armed police and there was not a wastebasket to be seen anywhere.
Airport security is a problem as terrorists will target the checkpoint wherever it might be. Of course, one could go for global cleansing, but that way lies Hitler and Stalin, and a few others.
Tolerance carries a price, but intolerance's price is even heavier.
Airport security is a problem as terrorists will target the checkpoint wherever it might be. Of course, one could go for global cleansing, but that way lies Hitler and Stalin, and a few others.
Tolerance carries a price, but intolerance's price is even heavier.
2
This is quite the condescending editorial....do you NYT have any idea how the EU institutions work? Do you realize the EU is not a carbon copy of the US and will never be?
Also now you are praising a supposed 650 billion $ investment in US homeland security...I thought you didn't like the way NSA handled things, as illustrated by the dozens of articles you wrote on the Snowden leaks
You even asked Obama to get Snowden home.
Now you are applauding them...you have no consistency whatsoever
Also now you are praising a supposed 650 billion $ investment in US homeland security...I thought you didn't like the way NSA handled things, as illustrated by the dozens of articles you wrote on the Snowden leaks
You even asked Obama to get Snowden home.
Now you are applauding them...you have no consistency whatsoever
77
A society that does not learn from its mistakes (and from the obvious mistakes of others) is doomed to live with (or die) from the consequences.
22
This Editorial takes the American hawk perspective of the problem. It assumes that the wars against the Muslim world are inevitable, the refugee flows are unavoidable, and the terrorism pouring out of that mess is a permanent problem in the nature of the Muslim world.
It further assumes that the only possible response is a stronger national security state to fight all that in the way our hawks want to fight it. They edge us into police states, with ending the things of peace like Europe's open internal borders.
Actually, many in Europe see alternatives: peace is possible; the refugees could be people who stay in their own stable homes; terrorism has drivers, things that push it, even if it is too simple to say "cause."
We run an insurgency in Syria, bombed Libya, invaded Iraq and are now back there, yet say peace is impossible because of what others do.
We see whole countries ruined and unlivable, yet see refugee flows as a separate problem.
We had no trouble saying that the Russians had their airliner bombed in Egypt in response to their intervention in Syria. Yet we insist that Western action across the whole Muslim world has not price and is unreleated to terrorism. Our hawks easily declare that terrorism is a response to what Russians do, yet insist that it is unreleated to what we do.
These hawkish attitudes are self defeating. We've caused our own problems, and doing more of the same is not "fighting" those problems, it is making them worse.
It further assumes that the only possible response is a stronger national security state to fight all that in the way our hawks want to fight it. They edge us into police states, with ending the things of peace like Europe's open internal borders.
Actually, many in Europe see alternatives: peace is possible; the refugees could be people who stay in their own stable homes; terrorism has drivers, things that push it, even if it is too simple to say "cause."
We run an insurgency in Syria, bombed Libya, invaded Iraq and are now back there, yet say peace is impossible because of what others do.
We see whole countries ruined and unlivable, yet see refugee flows as a separate problem.
We had no trouble saying that the Russians had their airliner bombed in Egypt in response to their intervention in Syria. Yet we insist that Western action across the whole Muslim world has not price and is unreleated to terrorism. Our hawks easily declare that terrorism is a response to what Russians do, yet insist that it is unreleated to what we do.
These hawkish attitudes are self defeating. We've caused our own problems, and doing more of the same is not "fighting" those problems, it is making them worse.
67
First of all i want to remind, that the homicide rate in germany is 0.8 per 100.000 citizen, in the US it is 3.6. So it is still much safer to live in germany than in the US. And we achieved this without locking away 2% of our society.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_... ).
About the security challenge, without doubt we could and should do more. Including a stringent deportation of migrants, who became criminals, or detention for people who obscure their original nationality or lie about their asylum cause. These are simple things, have nothing to do with more surveillance of a bigger federal intelligence. We just need some of this 'broken window' attitude, that brought NY back to security from its violent past.
And we need a better narrative in general. We have million of muslim fleeing islamic terror, we should utilize them to counter Salafism, Wahabism, or anything like that. At the moment we get just excuses and prevarications from the muslims. That is not enough to drain the source of terrorism.
The ME will remain a source of trouble, of forced migration, unless we will be able to foster a resilient civil society. We should keep this in mind as our objective. This security challenge will go on forever as long as we are not willing to go up all the way to the source. And the muslims have to be an essential part of that challenge.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_... ).
About the security challenge, without doubt we could and should do more. Including a stringent deportation of migrants, who became criminals, or detention for people who obscure their original nationality or lie about their asylum cause. These are simple things, have nothing to do with more surveillance of a bigger federal intelligence. We just need some of this 'broken window' attitude, that brought NY back to security from its violent past.
And we need a better narrative in general. We have million of muslim fleeing islamic terror, we should utilize them to counter Salafism, Wahabism, or anything like that. At the moment we get just excuses and prevarications from the muslims. That is not enough to drain the source of terrorism.
The ME will remain a source of trouble, of forced migration, unless we will be able to foster a resilient civil society. We should keep this in mind as our objective. This security challenge will go on forever as long as we are not willing to go up all the way to the source. And the muslims have to be an essential part of that challenge.
58
"...terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11 have claimed 45 lives while in Europe, the four largest attacks — in Madrid, London, Paris and Brussels — plus some smaller attacks have claimed nearly 10 times that number." This is true as it stands if you only look at terror committed by Muslims. What about all the attacks that good old home grown nuts with guns have perpetrated? Why is it terror if a Muslim is involved, but second amendment rights if not?
96
This discussion is about Islamic terrorism and how Europe should address it and not about general attacks on people. We need to distinguish this fact if we are to address the concern adequately.
22
It is only "45" because you do not count US passport holders! If an American christian fundamentalist kills scores of people outside of an abortion clinic, that number is not "counted" in your 45! Americans are not terrorists but "gunmen" only Muslim are counted or labeled as terrorists! The US has a mass shooting (definition:4 or more people killed at one time) statistically DAILY. The numbers of people killed in the US in one hour, one day or one year is UNHEARD of in the European Union.
15
"Scores of people killed outside an abortion clinic"? I missed that news so please be specific!
4
Why this Big Noise about Europe's "urgent" security. Some attacks of disappointed immigrant youth are neither war nor revolution. They are not worse than murder in NYC or the permanent gun "accidents". What is really embarrassing are the xenophobic remarks coming from The United States which is basically an immigration land, and it would be much better if it could solve its own social problems.
25
Question: Do you think the United States should remain an "immigration land" forever? At what point rapidly absorbing 3rd world masses may not a such a good idea anymore?
34
Another point. You wrote:
"What is really embarrassing are the xenophobic remarks coming from The United States which is basically an immigration land, and it would be much better if it could solve its own social problems."
Has it occurred to you that our problems may be unsolvable precisely because we are an "immigration land", and too much cultural, racial and ethnic diversity interferes with the nation's ability to follow a common path?
"What is really embarrassing are the xenophobic remarks coming from The United States which is basically an immigration land, and it would be much better if it could solve its own social problems."
Has it occurred to you that our problems may be unsolvable precisely because we are an "immigration land", and too much cultural, racial and ethnic diversity interferes with the nation's ability to follow a common path?
20
Didn't realize that the United States was "rapidly absorbing 3rd world masses." Do you have some figures handy to prove your point?
2
Europe's security problems cannot be solved without American leadership. The United States needs to use its expertise, wealth, and strength to help the Europeans unite their security services. As it stands, Europe has no effective passive defenses against terrorism. Their resources are primarily reactionary, which forces them to operate a step behind the Islamists. Consequently, European security assets depend on high-profile raids and after-the-fact investigations. These methods only exacerbate their security issues by terrifying local populations and raising (mutual) animosity.
Security efforts in Europe need to emphasize clandestine and proactive tactics. By remaining in the shadows and on the initiative, the Europeans can pressure radical groups into mistakes before they have the footing necessary to carry out attacks.
Obviously, all of this necessitates unprecedented levels of coordination and cooperation. It is also far easier said than done, particularly in the context of European political (and economic) paralysis. These problems incontrovertibly necessitate a massive American leadership effort.
Security efforts in Europe need to emphasize clandestine and proactive tactics. By remaining in the shadows and on the initiative, the Europeans can pressure radical groups into mistakes before they have the footing necessary to carry out attacks.
Obviously, all of this necessitates unprecedented levels of coordination and cooperation. It is also far easier said than done, particularly in the context of European political (and economic) paralysis. These problems incontrovertibly necessitate a massive American leadership effort.
2
Borrowed money isn't wealth.
8
Europe has made a point to direct its money to social endeavors, which include paying for the education, and later, jailing, of its people, including the terrorists. In more than 30 years, leftist governments have spent defense money to pay for social benefits. In France, even after 130 murdered in the street of paris, they are so wimpish that they cannot pass a law to take away french citizenship away from terrorists. Europe is an administrative group but not a fighting entity. Their leaders are managers who ignore everything about war and military subjects. Would Putin decide to invade Europe he would succeedingin only one week. Europe cannot defend itself against migrants, can you imagine them resisting the red army with a former kgb officer/judo black belt at its head? Europe has called the situation they find themselves in upon themselves. 30 years of being leftist softies will do that. But now they cannot even defend themselves against unarmed migrants. Again they count on the US to save them. Trump is right to want to review nato, Why should the US subsidize their generous social benefits by allowing them to cut their defense budget when there is so little benefits in the US for Americans?
18
This is not a revelation concerning Europe's inability to defend itself. Didn't the Germans march into Paris in six weeks? How long before Poland fell?
The only Europeans to put up a great and effective fight were the British although using a great deal of materials from the US as in the Lend Lease Program. They did a fantastic job in the air war.
The Soviets did very well but sustained huge losses of life. Their strength was their belief in their culture and political system. And that may be the problem for the rest of Europe. A lack of faith in themselves and those they elect to redistribute their wealth into social programs.
The only Europeans to put up a great and effective fight were the British although using a great deal of materials from the US as in the Lend Lease Program. They did a fantastic job in the air war.
The Soviets did very well but sustained huge losses of life. Their strength was their belief in their culture and political system. And that may be the problem for the rest of Europe. A lack of faith in themselves and those they elect to redistribute their wealth into social programs.
5
Much can be improved, until now there is no intelligence-sharing between European intelligence services ... at best it is intelligence-bartering. This has to change, but calls for a European "FBI" have already been rebuffed by Germany.
One comment : Brussels indeed has 6 "police zones" (just as NY has 77 precincts). Additionally, Federal Police guard the Airport and have nation-wide authority, Military Police guard the Parliament and NATO, EU and the subway system have their own internal security services. How does this square with your claim of "over a dozen different police forces" ?
One comment : Brussels indeed has 6 "police zones" (just as NY has 77 precincts). Additionally, Federal Police guard the Airport and have nation-wide authority, Military Police guard the Parliament and NATO, EU and the subway system have their own internal security services. How does this square with your claim of "over a dozen different police forces" ?
"From its inception, the European Union has been more about economic than political integration."
Or to put it differently, the European Union is less of a "union" and more of a joint commercial enterprise, which is, after all, not a bad idea.
However, is is somewhat naive to think that the individual European countries will give up any of their political independence or autonomy, quirky and inefficient as component parts of some of these might be.
Europe does not have a history of "teamwork", beyond the economic incentive of the EU; just the opposite is true. The influx of refugees and the existence of large non-integrated, non-European- teamwork- oriented (Islamic) societies make the European teamwork suggestion unlikely.
Unfortunately, there is a different teamwork in Europe at the moment and that teamwork is growing by leaps and bounds.
Or to put it differently, the European Union is less of a "union" and more of a joint commercial enterprise, which is, after all, not a bad idea.
However, is is somewhat naive to think that the individual European countries will give up any of their political independence or autonomy, quirky and inefficient as component parts of some of these might be.
Europe does not have a history of "teamwork", beyond the economic incentive of the EU; just the opposite is true. The influx of refugees and the existence of large non-integrated, non-European- teamwork- oriented (Islamic) societies make the European teamwork suggestion unlikely.
Unfortunately, there is a different teamwork in Europe at the moment and that teamwork is growing by leaps and bounds.
5
Want to stop the attacks in Europe ? Stop western attacks in the Middle East. - the land of an eye for an eye.
40
Your solution would certainly go a long way toward ending terrorism in my opinion m
2
We need to seriously consider requiring that every foreigner who wants to visit the United States first apply for a visa.
12
As an American woman married to a Swiss man, I question whether demanding a visa for all foreigners is really necessary. Do you really think that Swiss men are a grave danger for society? Have you considered how your plan will harm the US tourism industry?
2
"Have you considered how your plan will harm the US tourism industry?"
Certainly. But all things considered, I think the requirement of a visa and the slight inconvenience it might impose on tourists is perfectly reasonable, and quite rational as well.
Certainly. But all things considered, I think the requirement of a visa and the slight inconvenience it might impose on tourists is perfectly reasonable, and quite rational as well.
5
They're too aggressive. Bad! Wait, they're not aggressive enough. Bad! No, they're too aggressive. Bad! Wait...
Y'all sure do like making speeches.
Y'all sure do like making speeches.
12
When it comes to Europe and Islam, the editors verge on ...
Ok, let's start over.
When it comes to Europe and Islam, the editors now want their cake and they want to eat their cake at the same time.
The editors constantly pontificate on the need for Europeans not to profile Muslims or, in the case of France, not to insist on secular dress on the part of public employees. Their pontification extends to the failure of European secular societies to assimilate a culture that refuses to assimilate western secular values. Yet, today the editors want the intelligence agencies of Europe to share information more freely on the profiles of suspected Islamist terrorists.
Does the editors' new found intelligence religion extend to the admittance of the wave of migrants from the Islamic Middle East or are they waiting for yet more evidence?
Sorry, but the editors have been wrong on the nature, the depth and the persistence of Islamic terrorism and today's admonishment of European intelligence competence smacks of monday morning quarterbacking.
Ok, let's start over.
When it comes to Europe and Islam, the editors now want their cake and they want to eat their cake at the same time.
The editors constantly pontificate on the need for Europeans not to profile Muslims or, in the case of France, not to insist on secular dress on the part of public employees. Their pontification extends to the failure of European secular societies to assimilate a culture that refuses to assimilate western secular values. Yet, today the editors want the intelligence agencies of Europe to share information more freely on the profiles of suspected Islamist terrorists.
Does the editors' new found intelligence religion extend to the admittance of the wave of migrants from the Islamic Middle East or are they waiting for yet more evidence?
Sorry, but the editors have been wrong on the nature, the depth and the persistence of Islamic terrorism and today's admonishment of European intelligence competence smacks of monday morning quarterbacking.
26
The NY Times is merely parroting Obama and Hillary, two people who refuse to say "Islamic" and "extremism" in the same sentence. Those same two also support open borders and unrestricted illegal immigration for political gain.
I predict the Euros will soon repudiate the Shengen Agreement and then move to re-establish their national borders. Without borders, are you even a country, or just a destination.
I predict the Euros will soon repudiate the Shengen Agreement and then move to re-establish their national borders. Without borders, are you even a country, or just a destination.
5
"European" security has existed under the super-power dominated umbrellas of NATO and Warsaw Pact for decades, perhaps obscuring local and regional divisions and rivalries.
Russia and the chaos of the Middle East is testing the new concept of Europe. I hope these crises unify Europe.
I doubt the path will be straight.
Russia and the chaos of the Middle East is testing the new concept of Europe. I hope these crises unify Europe.
I doubt the path will be straight.
8
Europe’s security situation is immensely more complex than ours. If we invested $650 billion in homeland security since 9/11, what would THEY need to invest over a similar period of time, with so many international borders, different languages and laws? Where in heaven’s name are they to find the money?
Europeans are quite humane when they can afford to be; and less so when they can’t. Hard-headed economics may militate toward pressure to conduct an energetic war of extermination against ISIS, one that can’t help but cause serious collateral damage. And I could see a witch hunt within Europe for ISIS operational personnel and even sympathizers that would make the hunt for Nazi sympathizers in France after WWII look like a child’s birthday party.
Problem is, they lack the troops and general military infrastructure to do THAT, although they probably could make things pretty miserable for their populations internally. But the integration requirements for Europe to contain this threat may simply be unattainable – a real central intelligence agency of Europe may be politically unthinkable unless it were to be like NATO, and basically led by the U.S., which could be equally unthinkable.
Rock and a hard place. Until we install a new president and she or he intensifies the (very) gradual Obama assault against ISIS, Europe may suffer more attacks. ISIS also is metastasizing throughout the Middle East and probably will take years to root out.
Not encouraging at all.
Europeans are quite humane when they can afford to be; and less so when they can’t. Hard-headed economics may militate toward pressure to conduct an energetic war of extermination against ISIS, one that can’t help but cause serious collateral damage. And I could see a witch hunt within Europe for ISIS operational personnel and even sympathizers that would make the hunt for Nazi sympathizers in France after WWII look like a child’s birthday party.
Problem is, they lack the troops and general military infrastructure to do THAT, although they probably could make things pretty miserable for their populations internally. But the integration requirements for Europe to contain this threat may simply be unattainable – a real central intelligence agency of Europe may be politically unthinkable unless it were to be like NATO, and basically led by the U.S., which could be equally unthinkable.
Rock and a hard place. Until we install a new president and she or he intensifies the (very) gradual Obama assault against ISIS, Europe may suffer more attacks. ISIS also is metastasizing throughout the Middle East and probably will take years to root out.
Not encouraging at all.
11
This is a no brainer. As for America we should immediately send a high level advisory team to assist. It would be tasked with bringing all our hard won experience too the table. In conjunction with our already large contingents already on the ground in Europe we can be of real assistance. And over all we can help most just by setting a good example. Though all of this will take time (years) it is doable.
9
Yes. A few water boards would be useful and perhaps you can lend us a shrub or two to stir up the natives.
21
I am sure that with their excellent reputation forged during Iraq and Afghanistan's extremely successful wars, US officers will be mostly welcome and will be able to give advice about not what to do.
22
Yes Paul, the United States as the "Problem Solver of the World" and its advisers. We know this tune much too well. Very hilarious!
13
Over and over again the argument of some neo-cons/liberal Hawks is desperately the same : protecting the borders is evil but controlling, tracking and systematically spying on its citizens (what the article calls "cooperation" here) is just fine...it's a sad evolution, both in Europe and in the US.
11
security would probably also be better if Europe stopped allowing millions of people to illegally enter and then stay in Europe, and force existing immigrant communities to either assimilate or leave immediately.
44
Not just "Europe's Urgent Security Challenge"- we are all challenged the world over by the new extremist terror movements - ISIS, ISIL, Da'esh, The New Caliphate, the Taliban and all the zealots who are radicalizing the youth of nations across our globe. Thousands of martyrs will be entering our countries sub rosa as they did in Boston on 9/11/2001. Many more days that will live in infamy. Notwithstanding cooperation among European countries strongly enforcing their anti-terrorist measures, there will still be the "man in the white hat" who will elude captors and detonate his explosive vest in some airport, some city street, some airplane, some public bus, some retaurant somewhere. We, innocents, can only hope and pray that the plans of the demented Muslim zealots will be thwarted at borders or within the city ghettos of Europe. Freedom of movement between borders won't sift the unwanted extreme terrorists from their nefarious massacres. Violence against the innocents is the calamitous currency of our times.
4