Terrorists Want People Afraid. Trump’s Alarmist Tweets Spark More Fear.
The president’s response to the London attack leaves terrorism experts perplexed and worried.
WASHINGTON ― On Dec. 19, 2016, after a failed asylum-seeker inspired by the Islamic State drove a truck into a Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 and injuring 56 others, former President Barack Obama offered condolences and condemnations.
Through a spokesman, he sent “thoughts and prayers” to the German people. The next day, he called German Chancellor Angela Merkel and pledged counterterrorism and law enforcement assistance. After that, publicly, he largely moved on.
On Saturday, five and a half months later, another ISIS-inspired attack took place, this time in London, when a van drove into pedestrians on London Bridge and the perpetrators then jumped out and stabbed people at nearby restaurants. Seven people were killed and 48 injured.
In the aftermath, President Donald Trump offered a wholly different approach than his predecessor. He accused London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan of downplaying the threat, using an out-of-context snippet of Khan’s remarks. In a series of four tweets, he used the London tragedy to tout his executive order banning travel from some predominately Muslim countries, which is pending Supreme Court review after several courts ruled it’s likely unconstitutional. He made an unclear point about the absence of a gun debate after an attack in which the perpetrators used knives and a truck. And he insisted that people should be alarmed.
That Trump responded this way wasn’t a surprise. After the attack in Germany, he had declared that “Islamist terrorists continually slaughter Christians in their communities and places of worship as part of their global jihad.” And while German police were still piecing together clues about the attack, he called for “these terrorists” to “be eradicated from the face of the earth.”
What troubled counterterrorism experts is that Trump’s approach as president hasn’t evolved. The patented alarmist response to terrorism attacks that he deployed in the election may have had political benefits to his campaign. But these experts view them as largely counterproductive to the goal of limiting the effectiveness of terrorist attacks.
“Terrorism only works if people are terrified,” said Clint Watts, a former FBI special agent. “And it seems like Trump’s comments, above all, seek to terrify.”
After a terror attack, world leaders should be objective, to the point, and focus on letting the public know when they are safe and when they are in danger, Watts said. “[Trump] does the opposite ― he creates confusion, he blurs lines, he makes people more fearful when they don’t necessarily need to be.”
More: Terrorists Want People Afraid. Trump's Alarmist Tweets Spark More Fear.
There is no doubt that Trump needlessly stokes fear with his confusing and misleading statements. I honestly believe Trump is mentally ill - but at a minimum he is childish and immature. He is certainly not presidential material. I worry about his judgement when confronted with a major crisis - and I'm not comforted by the quality of people around him or their ability to control him.
The president’s response to the London attack leaves terrorism experts perplexed and worried.
WASHINGTON ― On Dec. 19, 2016, after a failed asylum-seeker inspired by the Islamic State drove a truck into a Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 and injuring 56 others, former President Barack Obama offered condolences and condemnations.
Through a spokesman, he sent “thoughts and prayers” to the German people. The next day, he called German Chancellor Angela Merkel and pledged counterterrorism and law enforcement assistance. After that, publicly, he largely moved on.
On Saturday, five and a half months later, another ISIS-inspired attack took place, this time in London, when a van drove into pedestrians on London Bridge and the perpetrators then jumped out and stabbed people at nearby restaurants. Seven people were killed and 48 injured.
In the aftermath, President Donald Trump offered a wholly different approach than his predecessor. He accused London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan of downplaying the threat, using an out-of-context snippet of Khan’s remarks. In a series of four tweets, he used the London tragedy to tout his executive order banning travel from some predominately Muslim countries, which is pending Supreme Court review after several courts ruled it’s likely unconstitutional. He made an unclear point about the absence of a gun debate after an attack in which the perpetrators used knives and a truck. And he insisted that people should be alarmed.
That Trump responded this way wasn’t a surprise. After the attack in Germany, he had declared that “Islamist terrorists continually slaughter Christians in their communities and places of worship as part of their global jihad.” And while German police were still piecing together clues about the attack, he called for “these terrorists” to “be eradicated from the face of the earth.”
What troubled counterterrorism experts is that Trump’s approach as president hasn’t evolved. The patented alarmist response to terrorism attacks that he deployed in the election may have had political benefits to his campaign. But these experts view them as largely counterproductive to the goal of limiting the effectiveness of terrorist attacks.
“Terrorism only works if people are terrified,” said Clint Watts, a former FBI special agent. “And it seems like Trump’s comments, above all, seek to terrify.”
After a terror attack, world leaders should be objective, to the point, and focus on letting the public know when they are safe and when they are in danger, Watts said. “[Trump] does the opposite ― he creates confusion, he blurs lines, he makes people more fearful when they don’t necessarily need to be.”
More: Terrorists Want People Afraid. Trump's Alarmist Tweets Spark More Fear.
There is no doubt that Trump needlessly stokes fear with his confusing and misleading statements. I honestly believe Trump is mentally ill - but at a minimum he is childish and immature. He is certainly not presidential material. I worry about his judgement when confronted with a major crisis - and I'm not comforted by the quality of people around him or their ability to control him.
