Political Science

The Senate voted 84-6 for the annual spending bill funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the year starting October 1, 2009, and now lawmakers must work out differences with a 42.6 billion version of the bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month.
If I were in a position of authority at the DHS and after considering the possible areas of vulnerability where terrorists are likely to strike, I would put emphasis on the transportation facilities of the United States on the land, sea and air.  The events of September 11, 2001 has shown us how terrorists will go to great lengths to attain their goals in bringing America to its knees (US Department of State, 2002, p. 3).  Gone are the days of hijacking.  They have now employed a different tack in using public transport as a tactical weapon as evidenced when they crashed airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.  It can also be possible they may use public transport to convey and deploy weapons of mass destruction be it nuclear, chemical or biological (Sauter and Carafano, 2005, p. 153).  They may not have the resources to procure or create missile platforms but 911 has shown us that they are capable of improvising.  Using public transport as tactical weapons also puts security forces in a dilemma when it comes down to a choice of killing a hundred to save thousands or millions.  This is not only a frightening scenario but one which is a no-win situation when it entails saving lives (Howard, Forest and Moore, 2006, pp. 105-106).

Public transportation systems need to invest in more manpower rather than rely on electronic surveillance systems.  This manpower must be well trained in counter-terrorist tactics which is not necessarily limited to actually apprehending terrorists.  This would include the ability to identify suspected terrorists.  I believe that following the Israeli model would be suitable for this.
I would also focus on intensifying the operations aspect of intelligence agencies on the aspect of human intelligence (HUMINT).  I believe that a proactive approach in addressing terrorist threat is better than reacting to a terrorist act.  By giving more emphasis on the operations side of intelligence, we can address all areas of vulnerabilities of Americas borders, infrastructure, commerce, food resources and transportation facilities (Dory, 2003, p. 24).  This may be something out of a techno-thriller novel only Tom Clancy would make or from the script of the hit TV series 24 but strange as it may seem, these fictitious media should serve as a wake-up call not only to the public but to the powers that be in addressing the terrorist threat. They have provided us with possible scenarios of potential terrorist attacks and what would be the possible consequences if we fail to stop them in time.  It is better to intercept or interdict terrorists right before they can commit their nefarious acts.  This would mean going after them while they are at their planning stage.  Efforts should be made to recruit agents who can infiltrate their ranks to gather vital intelligence that is needed to stop them.  This is by far the area where the American intelligence community is very weak which is why terrorist organizations have the upper hand (Sauter and Carafano, 2005, p. 243).

Intelligence is the key to winning the war on terror and in gathering intelligence to prevent terrorist attacks, we need to invest more in HUMINT as they can provide more reliable information vital to winning the war.  By being a step ahead of the terrorists, we are assured of success, not only in neutralizing the terrorists, but also in keeping America safe without the loss of innocent life.