The Attack, by Kurt Schlichter

! [[The Attack.jpg]] Hello everyone! What a sobering choice of novel for our book club last month! “The Attack” by Kurt Schlichter is probably one of the more controversial options we’ve talked about in a while, for a few widely differing reasons. And perhaps more pertinently to the discussion about the book, I think my own thoughts on it will probably be a bit controversial too. The reason for the apprehension is simple; The Attack is a fictional novel that details what is considered by many to be an extremely likely form of terror attack on the American homeland. In short, the author details a multi-phased, large-scale Islamic terror attack in shockingly accurate detail…if such an attack were to ever happen, the author’s fictional account is an accurate telling of how it might go down. In non-standard fashion, I won’t go into the specifics of the plot for those who have not read the novel. As it’s a fictional book, the specifics are less important than the general idea, I think, and I’m guessing that those who have not read the book may wish to do so (sans spoilers) at some point. Below are some of my random thoughts that I haven’t really been able to organize that well. Maybe by hearing some of your thoughts on this book (especially the thoughts in the context of the current threat environment) will help me come to a bit more of a solidified position. I think most people will read the book, sit back, and say “whelp, that’s something”. As in, there’s not much more to comment on other than admitting that most of the story is quite plausible. Considering the recent narratives that have energed (and world events that have transpired) this fictional tame hits a little close to home. For me though, I can’t shake the feeling that something is not quite right when it comes to the potential for widespread terrorism to make an emergence inside the United States. In short, my perspectives have definitely changed over the years: I spent my whole career thinking that another 9/11 was just around the corner, every single day. When in reality, basically zero terror groups actually had the gumption or capability to pull that off again (or perhaps, even in the first place). Then, once I came to the conclusion that a major terror attack like 9/11 can’t really happen (or at least, can’t happen without a dozen different agencies being involved already, in which case it can’t be prevented anyway), I shifted into the “small wars” mindset of irregular warfare being the biggest threat. Lone gunmen, vehicle ramming attacks, and the like. The past decade reflected that being a major threat as well, as lone-wolf attacks have certainly been more of a threat than most people realize. But now, my own perspective has come full circle to arrive at a crossroads…I still think that a massive terror attack like 9/11 is largely unlikely. However that perspective is changing due to one event…the fall of Syria. The fall of Syria over the past few weeks demonstrates a few things, namely that historic rivals in the Islamic extremism space have found the desire to work with each other more than they have done in the past. Of course, I personally think Syria will devolve into tribal infighting sooner than later but right now, at a time of global instability, it’s important to see that terror groups like HTS have been able to demonstrate that ISIS, al-Qaeda, and even some minor Kurdish factions can indeed work together to reach a common goal. Granted, the United States was driving much of this effort, but still. In addition to the very palpable national security concerns that the government either isn’t capable of recognizing or simply apathetic toward, this fictional tale (along with the modern context of current events such as the drone incursions at US military bases) highlights how effective other nationstates can be in waging war on the American homeland under the guise of a series of low-level terror attacks. Forget al-Qaeda for a moment, and imagine the potential a nationstate might have if they were to use the same tactics. In a grander sense, it’s a vastly cheaper means of waging war without openly waging war. From the fentanyl crisis to mysterious drones, there’s huge potential to cause a lot of problems very easily, for the nationstate adversary looking to cause trouble for the American homeland. The “fight them over there, so we don’t fight them over here” hasn’t actually worked. What it has done, is gone “over there” and pissed off everyone, so that they now want to come “over here”, when beforehand they were perfectly fine with staying “over there” and fighting amongst themselves. Just like with Ukraine; the war seemed to be a good investment in the beginning. Drain Russia’s resources, and make them fight for every inch of influence they could muster. And more importantly, cause pitfalls in logistics to prevent Russia from developing their relationship with China. How is that plan working out? Russia has ended up bleeding every single NATO member of nearly everything, and in return Russia has drastically increased/developed their relationship with China. So all things considered, the American involvement in the Ukrainian war has done the exact opposite of what was intended. Same story with the Middle East. And I’m afraid, same story with the concept of Islamic-based terrorism here in the United States. This means that my own thoughts on this rather interesting tale are quite a bit inflammatory, I’m afraid. And I’m sure quite many will say are full of bias. In short, I think the plot of this book (as in, a major terror attack) is quite possible, but not to the scale that it’s implied in the book. This is fairly easy to agree with fairly universally I think, after all it is a work of fiction and thus host to quite a bit of dramatization. All of which is totally fair. Personally, however, I can’t shake the feeling that this work of fiction is a propaganda piece intended to drive up fear of an October 7th style attack here in the United States…and thus stoke the political outcome that would be implied by that effort. I cannot say with any certainty that this was the author’s goal himself, but this work would be great ammunition for those seeking to capitalize on the fear potential. Which can be said about most fictional tales involving terror attacks, to be honest. One of the old habits of mine is to sometimes look at an event or an idea through the lens of what the intended effect is. Why show this particular piece of information, for instance? Why run this particular news story? If the goal is to stoke outrage, rather than a more feasible outcome, that piece of information is suspect. Same with works like this; if it’s intended to serve as a motivating factor for starting a war in the Middle East, I would be very cautious about the lessons learned from it. But rather than open that can of worms too much, I’d rather focus on the lessons learned (or rather theories discussed, since it’s fiction, after all) that apply to the average everyday person. I myself might have looked at the Oct 7th attacks and theorized that something similar might happen here at home. That’s not that big of a leap, on the surface. And, it’s no secret that the majority of counterterrorism entities, from the agencies themselves to the average concerned citizen, are well aware that the risks of a major terror attack are substantially increased at this point in time. We can see this as smaller, lower-level attacks have shown most organized terrorists where the vulnerabilities are, and that since the US can’t stop low-level, “lone-wolf” attacks, the US is going to be hard pressed to stop anything more major. Is this seemingly contradictory idea utterly insane? To believe that at the exact same moment, the U.S. is long overdue for a major terror attack, but when one does occur, it probably will not occur naturally? Perhaps this is a demonstration of my own frustrations over the years, and the swing-and-a-miss nature of how real-world experiences have worked out. Somehow, even when a major terror attack occurs (or is thankfully is stopped beforehand) the circumstances absolutely never turn out to be completely non-suspicious; there’s always a plethora of details that make absolutely no sense and make us all think "false flag" or have some other similar instinctive reaction. This certainly seems like a rather insane idea, or that I am being contrary just for the sake of hating on the feds. I have really tried to reexamine this and make sure that my own line of thinking is as neutral as possible, but here’s the deal. We think “ah, okay, indicators are stacking up that some kind of Islamic-based terror attack is very likely to occur sometime soon”….*attack happens*…and the first indicators that we get from the scene very strongly indicate that something else is afoot. Just like the assassination attempts with regards to Donald Trump during the campaign. We ALL knew that the risk to Trump was great, after all the media alone did everything they could to paint him with a target throughout the whole ordeal. But, here’s the interesting and infuriating part…when somebody finally does attempt to target him, that individual is one of the most suspicious humans who ever lived, and the entire situation, to be frank, looks like a CIA hit job that failed. Whether or not that’s true, will be debated probably as long as the JFK ordeal. However, that was (and still is) one of the predominant theories, and demonstrates the concept: Something is predicted, that thing happens, and the aftermath indicates that this “something” did not occur organically. I really am struggling to view this book in the context in which it was intended, because I agree with the general premise: The United States is very much at risk for some sort of catastrophic event, either from traditional forms of terrorism, or (more likely) terroristic attacks supported by a foreign nationstate. BUT, if the plot of this book were to happen (God forbid, seriously), my first instinctive thought would mirror that of many Americans…that the CIA did it or had a hand in it somehow. This is why I have delayed this book review for so long; I finished it in October and have been thinking about it since, without any solid way of compiling these thoughts into something productive or meaningful. So what do you all think? Are these ideas completely off-base, or is there some sort of legitimacy to these thoughts?