Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis
Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis
1. Within the framework of a hazard and vulnerability analysis, what were the pre-9/11 indicators that a possible disaster (terrorist attack) might occur?
By the late 1980s, foreign terrorists began to operate in the United States of America. Japanese Red Army member, Yu Kikumura planned but never carried out his bombing. Hezbollah was operating a major cigarette-smuggling ring between North Carolina and Detroit. In the early 1990s, international terrorism had a new face Middle Eastern. After the attack by the U.S. forces on its base in Afghanistan Al-Qaida immideately began to reconstitute into a terrorist organization. In 1993, the World Trade Center was targeted in New York by Islamic groups (Nance, 2013). The New York City subway bombing involved two Palestinians who entered the United States via Canada and planned to bomb the subway system in New York. The new language of terrorism included Al-Qaida and Islamic Jihad; the new players entered the field with the names of Bin Laden and Sheikh Omar. The new targets were not a building or a person they were American symbols.
Morgan (2009) observes that non-terrorist acts took place before 9/11. Pre-9/11 indicators include crimes that may be identified as acts of terrorism, for example, thefts of weapons or crimes to procure funding for the terrorist groups. Admittedly, these preparatory behaviors of terrorists could prepare the government to prevent 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many of the terrorist attack pre-incident indicators prior to the 9/11 were clear and unambiguous to a trained intelligence analyst. There were signs and incidents pointing to a growing Islamic militancy. The new terror is a new military era, and it did not start on 11 September 2001. Its first international manifestation began with the first attack of the World Trade Center in 1993 by Ramzi Yusuf. The Islamic groups in Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia prosecuted their campaigns of terror. Finally, the pre-9/11 indicators are the evidence that a possible disaster like 9/11 terrorist attack might occur.
Read also: "Academic Book Review: How to Complete It"
2. Could this strike have been pre-empted? What factors, if changed, may have pre-empted the September 11 attack?
September 11 terrorist attack has evoked strong emotions and polarized opinions related to whether this strike may have been pre-empted. The research has shown that this issue is often discussed in the round tables, and is not very well understood in the international relations. Many researchers have argued that the government had to find methods and techniques to solve conflicts between people nationally and internationally in order to prevent 9/11 terrorist attack. The USA is a democratic country, and this makes it vulnerable to terrorist attacks (Atwater, Gopalan, Lancioni, & Hunt, 2010). Better migration policies and laws could have pre-empted the September 11 attack. However, it requires resources to protect the country day and night. Every citizen of the United States should realize that he or she is also responsible for homeland security. On the other hand, the government is accountable for 9/11 terrorist attack in New York City and Washington. American expansion in the Middle East, in such countries like Afghanistan and Iran for example, has led to such drastic consequences.
The research asserts that the Jewish-Muslim conflict is a result of global terrorism as well as 9/11 terrorist attack. The attacks were in the New York City, where the many Jewish community numbers are concentrated. Washington, D.C. also hosts many Jewish lobby groups that compelled the U.S. government to support Israel. The terrorist attacks of September 11 clearly were intended to send a message. Bin Laden had claimed that if the pro-Israel policy is abandoned visibly and clearly, then he will abandon his terrorist program (Pradesh, 2004). Actually, there are many different opinions concerning the reasons of 9/11 terrorist attacks. The first reason is the U.S. policy in the Middle East. However, this is a complicated question, and the situation could not have been changed easily. Some global societal changes have also influenced the course of events that took place on September 11, 2001.
3. Is there any indication that New York or Washington, D.C., utilized a hazard and/or vulnerability analysis in their planning for this type of disaster? Elaborate in your responses.
Utilizing a hazard and vulnerability analysis in their planning for this type of disaster, American authorities declared war on terrorism. Moreover, they ensured people that the most radical weapons to stop the terrorists were appropriate. Pre-emptied actions should be taken rather than permit the devastating consequences from terrorist attacks. New technological and strategic realities require new approaches to defend the country from terrorism. The problem is that terrorists groups are decentralized, and it is hard to identify their location. Nevertheless, international law and practice approve that force should be used to stop terrorism and military intervention. Since then, homeland security has become hometown security. Every individual in New York and Washington realized that they have to contribute to homeland security. Terrorism is very hard to identify and destroy, thus there should be methods and strategies that could protect people from this disaster.
Admittedly, New York and Washington have utilized a hazard and vulnerability analysis after September 11 terrorist attack. It has become absolutely clear that stronger pre-empted measures and state-of-the-art technologies are necessary, such as improved management, collection, and dissemination of perishable data. Both research and guidance are needed in determining how to exploit different tools to prevent similar attacks. Mueller (2010) observes that people in the United States, especially in New York and Washington, have become more vulnerable and threatened after 9/11. The government has implemented various strategies and techniques in order to protect people from terrorism. Crises plans are an important part of security from the mentioned above types of disasters. However, these plans should be constantly reviewed and updated. Emergency operations centers and alternative sites should be prepared in advance. Emergency authorities are working hard to improve security planning and emergency preparedness of all operating agencies.