Terrorists today launched short range rockets at US cities from Mexico. It is not yet known exactly where the rockets landed and preliminary damage reports are still being investigated.
The perpetrators have not yet been positively identified, however terrorist groups including Hamas, Hezbollah, the Palestine Liberation Front and the Palestine Liberation Organization have previously been identified by the US government as dealing in drugs and arms along the US Southern border. A US State Department spokesman acknowledged they were aware of the terrorist’s presence but said they had “absolutely no idea” the groups possessed such advanced armaments. In extensive off the record remarks a government official further speculated that Venezuela was probably the weapons origination point and they were most likely smuggled over land with the assistance of drug cartels into Mexico.
Recent violence in the northern Mexican states of Sonora, Chihuahua and the city of Tijuana has increasingly made those areas a “no mans land” for Mexican federal troops. The widespread lawlessness and corruption has led to growing US speculation that greater Mexico is bordering on becoming a failed state.
US military experts have identified the weapons consist of two rocket types similar to those currently used in Gaza. The first is a version of the Russian “Grad” rocket which has an estimated range of approximately 40 km. The second is thought to be a Syrian version of the Katyusa which has a range of approximately 30 km. Firing these weapons from border areas puts major US cities such as San Diego, Yuma, El Paso and Tucson suburbs within range. It also threatens military installations such as Fort Huachuca, Fort Bliss and the Yuma Proving Ground and the San Diego Naval base.
President Bush called the attacks an “act of terror” and immediately ordered military counterstrikes to prevent further attacks and “ensure the protection of US citizens”, continuing the successful tactics used since 9-11. However, this response has again been roundly criticized by other world leaders, United Nations, Vatican and Democratic Party members. The primary criticism has been that such military responses do not “consider” the affect on civilian populations, which foreign sources say are suffering from this most recent action. They also maintain that sufficient dialogue and negotiations have not been held and represent an endemic failure of this administration.
President Bush also stated that if a Venezuelan connection is uncovered he will take appropriate action, no matter where it leads during his remaining days in office. This posture continues the successful strategy used to protect the US from further terrorist attacks during his presidency.
A spokesman for President-elect Barack Obama made the following statement;
“President-elect Obama is closely monitoring global events”.. “but there is one president at a time.”
However, sources believe that based on past statements Obama’s approach will be much different. Some experts have speculated that he will use “low level channels” to open a dialogue with the perpetrators, believing that Bush’s policies have been counter productive to resolving related issues. They also believe based on past statements Obama will open a dialogue with Iran, a country many have identified as the core of recent anti-US terrorism saying he wanted to pursue a policy of “respect”. Overall, this approach has troubled some critics who say it is reminiscent of the pre 9-11 policies pursued by President Clinton.
* This is an illustrative apologue based on factual references. It has been constructed to presuppose a series of events and probable outcomes based on historical data in order to contrast potential responses