Response To A Discussion Board Peer Reviewed

your critique posts should be at least 250 words and at least 1 reference!!

The suicide bombing that took place April 3, 2017 on the metro line in St. Petersburg brought horror back to Russia’s reality, as it claimed 14 lives and injured 51 others (“St. Petersburg Attack: What We Know,” 2017). While this terrified the nation anew, the sad reality is that this is just one more in the list of attacks by terrorists on public infrastructure that have rocked the country since 2009 (“St. Petersburg Attack: What We Know,” 2017). The fact that this event took place in such a commonly used area/line of transportation creates fear, not just in the people of Russia, but in people all around the world, as it shows how quickly terrorism can strike and how hard it is to prevent.

The United States has a unique approach to dealing with the matter of terrorism and trying to prevent future attacks, and the nine questions in the article outline what each one of them are. The questions try to make sure the information acquired about attacks result in real information, and not the conjectures that have been common in the media as of late. They focus on quickly determining if another attack is likely to come, who was involved, and both the ties and the motivation that the attacker had (“St. Petersburg Attack: What We Know,” 2017). The importance of these questions are in the way that they try to quickly establish whether the authorities need to be urgently searching for another possible site of attack and related bombs, as well as whether the people who did it are dead or on the loose. These all matter in trying to contain the damage from such attacks and limit the chance that they will happen again.

All nine of the questions are helpful and important ones to consider, but the top two that are the most important are “Is there another attack coming?” and “Were the attackers part of a larger network?” (Byman, 2017). The first question that tries to discern if another attack is coming is important because this is how law enforcement can know to search other similar, or related, places, and to alert the public to stay in doors. Additionally, it can help police keep an eye on suspicious persons in areas that would be prime targets for terrorism because of their potential casualty count, and so this question provides the high alert that is necessary. Furthermore, the question regarding whether the attackers were part of a larger network is important to ask and answer because these networks result in future attacks and a general state of concern regarding their mission (Byman, 2017). If the network is identified and put at the center of investigations, then authorities can learn enough about it to hopefully disrupt future plans for violence and destruction. Getting to know the enemy is the key to beating him, and in terrorism this is a complicated undertaking, but one that has to be done in order to increase security.

The additional question I would add to the list would be why the person selected the place they chose to carry out the attack. There are many places that have concentrations of people, but terrorists choose targets based on reasons that often go much deeper than that. If the value of targets through the terrorist’s perspective is understood, then places that are potential targets can be better protected. Terrorists often choose certain locations because there are so many people and they can blend into the crowd, but if authorities could figure out the draw, or connection, behind selected sites they could offer more protection for them.