English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-08-18 06:02:27 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

17 answers

Sensationalism for one thing. You have a huge target, many on board, headed to a place where they could do more damage. Million fly daily and terrorist love to "terrorize" people, to stop them, to change their lives. If we give in, they win, if we don't they lose.

2006-08-18 06:08:38 · answer #1 · answered by MadforMAC 7 · 1 0

I think it has a lot to do with the answer above (by PMW...): destroy infrastructure or, at least make people weary of using them. Besides airplanes, common terrorist targets are buses, trains and subways. A bomb in the subway of a major city will have people reluctant to use them for a period of time and this increases the terror effect.

Another reason might be the effectiveness of targetting means of mass transportation. The potential casualty in relation to the weapon used is much higher because: 1) you have a high concentration of people; 2) the speed of the transportation increases the destruction potential. That way, even a small bomb can take down a plane or derail a train with a huge death potential. If you compare that to the Oklahoma bombing, that required a truck of explosives, you see why this logic makes sense.

2006-08-18 08:16:06 · answer #2 · answered by leblongeezer 5 · 0 0

They used the airline frame of mind because its a superior message than merely a customary bomb. Bombs bypass off each and each of the time. yet imagine creating use of a lfying bomb. so some distance as sneaking knives on board. obviously it would want to be executed as protection grow to be no longer that tight. There were no precendent to set protection at such ranges as they're actually. also, the human beings monitoring the airplane on the floor merely try this, they exhibit screen and communicate. even as the planes veared off beam. All they could do is communicate. they could contact the airplane, obviously there might want to be no reaction if a terorist is flying the airplane. by technique of the time it really is known by technique of the man monitoring, they could ought to inform their manager, then the manager might want to have notify whoever else to scramble some jets to intercept the airplane. In all that era of time, theres no way those planes might want to be stopped. inspite of in the adventure that they could be stopped. What are u going to do? Shoot down an american airways jet with probably thousands of human beings on board. I dont imagine so. exceptionally if u didnt recognize in the first position who grow to be flying the airplane. they could have veared off beam for any type of innocuous causes. Heavy fog, extreme seen air site visitors no longer with the ability to considered on radar.

2016-11-26 00:20:31 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

because a plane is totally isolated when it is in the air. basically everyone on board WILL die since they cant call for help from anyone. and also because if the terrorists want a reaction from more than one country they will get it by targetting a plane since there is likely to be people from 2 or more countries on the plane. it makes it more INTERNATIONAL.

2006-08-18 06:34:41 · answer #4 · answered by shakira 4 · 0 0

It is only in very recent years that terrorists targetted planes, so I would not say it is "most of the time". The most recent terrorist attacks on transport has been trains in India, Spain and the UK.

2006-08-18 06:49:32 · answer #5 · answered by confused 4 · 0 1

good question i have wondered myself,the whole plane idea is dumb,if a terrist really wanted to cause mass terror,their are way better ideas,like lining a bag with explosives,shoes maybe taped to their crotch,get like 10 guys all packed go to a huge sporting event,maybe like 5 baseball games or football games,in different states,then sit in different spots boom,that would cause mass fear,same with malls,power plants,look at progress reports on how the government has done protecting our power plants,small nuke plants...they gave the government like a d grade...going after planes may only get you 300 people but sporting events....at least 500-1000 people,not just from the explosions,but from the people trying to leave the stadium,then the economics of the sports world,i think going after planes is a stupid idea,that's another reason why people think governments are involved with terr ism,in other country's they go after trains,market places......just does not add up,people should think of the whole picture instead of just what a bomb can do,mass panic can cause just as much violence as a bomb....think about it......

2006-08-18 08:06:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because the friends of the Bush administration are on those planes. Businesspeople, higher-incomed families, people who most likely would vote Republican. If terrorists attacked a bus terminal, their threats would only be targeted toward low-income, possibly homeless, often minority individuals who would most likely vote Democrat. Bush wouldn't respond to a terrorist attack on a Greyhound bus; those lives wouldn't matter to him. -RKO-

2006-08-18 06:24:24 · answer #7 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0 1

To install fear in the general public. That's the whole point of terrorism, but when you choose something like a plane - there's no way for people to protect themselves, or get out of the situation.

Also, I think because there's really no one up there to stop the act once it's been initiated.

That's why I'm glad for people like flight marshalls to take care of us.

2006-08-18 06:09:24 · answer #8 · answered by Kerry 3 · 1 0

A way to break infrastructure. Thats why they target mass transit

2006-08-18 07:07:51 · answer #9 · answered by PMW1718 3 · 0 0

Cheap and effective. I mean it only cost those guys what? $300 a piece to kill 3000 Americans during 911?

2006-08-18 06:39:07 · answer #10 · answered by Lotus Phoenix 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers