Byline: William M. Arkin

washingtonpost.com Early Warning blogger William M. Arkin , who writes on national security issues, was online Thursday, Aug. 10, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss Britain's announcement that it has thwarted a plot to blow up planes flying between the U.K. and U.S.

The transcript follows.

____________________

William M. Arkin: Hello all. Been fielding a lot of phone calls today and trying to understand what happened and what we know, just like many of you, so I'll do my best.

My initial take though: If we were following some set of potential hijackers and knew that they were going to use liquids to make explosives, why didn't we institute new security procedures at the moment we knew that rather than in panic mode today? It seems we still have not mastered the "actionable intelligence" thing, that is, in ensuring security first and intelligence and investigations second.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Everybody, I think, sees a specific trend towards global terrorism singling out the U.S. and the U.K. for major future terrorist operations. Assuming this trend is a fact, which I believe it is, do you believe we (the U.S.) are giving al-Qaeda and any other terrorist organizations that are a threat, everything they need and hope for with regards to propaganda, recruitment and justification for their campaign? Do you agree that al-Qaeda has been the biggest beneficiary of the war in Iraq and the lack of focus on Afghanistan? Or, contrary to that, do you think we really have al-Qaeda on the run?

William M. Arkin: I do believe we have al-Qaeda on the run, that is, in the sense that we are engaged in a war with them. But seeing al-Qaeda as one organization doing one thing is a bit of a mistake. It is a terrorism subculture, a religious calling, political movement, and since 9/11, it has become mere inspiration for independent activity united under a common banner and approach.

I do believe that the war in Iraq has galvanized thousands to take up arms to defend Islam (or just to put the hurt on the United States). It is hard to forecast what could have happened had we not invaded Iraq, but the compulsion on the part of so many to take up arms against us is not being adequately addressed, Iraq or not.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Bill,

You've been downplaying the global terrorist threat on your site for months. Why are you qualified to comment on it today?

William M. Arkin: Thanks for reading my blog. :)

I don't think I've been downplaying the global terrorist threat. I've been questioning how the government describes it and the war against terrorism.

Let's just take today's news: Something motivated these men (and they are most likely men) to take up arms and be willing to give their own lives. We can move forward just seeing them as evil, as dupes, as misfits, and follow the prevalent strategy of attrition. I'm arguing that doesn't work. We have instead to figure out what motivates them and then respond accordingly. I submit al Qaeda and other "terrorist" organizations want something and I reject completely the notion that if we listen we are either capitulating or appeasing them or acting weak.

_______________________

Austin, Tex.: In a question asked during Dana's discussion earlier, a reference was made about checking their laptop vs carrying it in through security due to the increased security requirements associated with today's threat level. It was my understanding it's liquid, gel, pastes that aren't being allowed on flights. Any ideas why this person might think they would need to check their laptop with their luggage?

William M. Arkin: I imagine in the days ahead, lots of funny things will be done at airports until things settle down. And my guess will be that liquids will be back on board sooner than later.

_______________________

Wilmington, N.C.: Help, please? Pre-arrest: no elevated threat level, we have the whole plot in our sights, everything under control.

Post-arrest: elevated threat level, not sure we have everybody, my sister has to trash her hairspray in the airport.

Could the arrest trigger be they lost track of one or more plotters, or are they just trying to get some PR mileage out of the arrest and remind us to vote Repub in Nov.?

William M. Arkin: Well, I guess the most important lesson to be learned will be whether they took advantage of what they knew about new threats to inform airline security, even on the QT. Secretary Chertoff says British intelligence and law enforcement accelerated the arrests when they "lost" a couple of the subjects. Can't fault them for that. But it does "stink" a little the color coding because during the 2004 election campaign there was so much promiscuous coloring by DHS.

_______________________

Fredericksburg, Va.: With the total ban on all liquids brought aboard aircraft, are the airlines still providing refreshments during the flights? And if they are, what security measures are being taken to ensure that those liquids are "safe"?