Consider this: What can we predict about the immediate political fallout if a substantial jihadist attack on American soil were to happen tomorrow?
Answer: As we saw following 9/11, the visceral response is to rally around the flag; to see clearly the truth that despite our diverse spectrum of interests and opinions, there is much more connecting us than separating us. But the partisanship of the moment would profoundly affect the internal contours of that response.
For starters, the response of President Donald Trump would mostly likely be predictable, somewhat juvenile, and entirely correct: “I told you so.” It is not hard to imagine a tweet consisting of precisely these words, despite their impropriety.
Such a response, would present all those vigorously resisting his leadership -- which is to say nearly all Democrats and some Republicans -- with a stark and unavoidable choice: double down or shut up. The atmosphere and national mood would encourage the latter; some converts might have a genuine change of heart, and others merely a keen sense of self-preservation.
The point of this thought experiment is to illustrate what Trump has already accomplished: he has, to no small degree, hamstrung our enemies. A large-scale tactical success for them would risk strategic disaster. Trump campaigned on the strategic advantage of unpredictability. The popular response to a large attack would, simply put, elevate him. That is a thing that the jihadists devoutly want him not to have, for reasons that should be obvious.
This is true because of the asymmetric nature of our conflict. We are the conventional power, clearly superior in resources and technology. They are the guerrilla force, relying on concealment, surprise, and a low-intensity conflict to neutralize those advantages....
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
