[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

First off, the families of those killed or injured in the South Korean subway tragedy have my utmost sympathies. I want to make that clear up front, since I'm about to use it as an example to support my thesis regarding the future of terrorism. I wish it had never happened. I also know it wasn't terrorism, but it's relevant nonetheless.

One person, acting alone, killed over 140 people in a single action. It didn't require a lot of technological ingenuity, nor did it require the backing of a rogue state. He just tossed a flaming container of liquid into a subway car. Not too difficult.

What's more, he was immediately jumped by other passengers. A pack, not a herd -- but it made no difference. It's nice to think that through group action we can thwart terrorism, but we can't. We can be effective. It's good that the guy was caught quickly. But citizen action isn't going to stop all of these.

I've seen arguments that the tragedy wouldn't have happened in New York, because we have better safety measures. Probably not this particular incident, nope. Other incidents? Sure; surely the fall of the WTC taught us that we haven't considered all the safety possibilities. Further, that line of thought brings us to the world in which we can't buy a steak because there are carcinogenic chemicals in meat, and I'm not too fond of that world. Things are too cotton-wrapped already. (Safety versus liberty, again.)

A world in which all rogue states are gone is not a world without terrorism. There are more than enough examples of individuals and non-state backed terrorist groups to prove this. We can't stamp out terrorism that way.

[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

Possibly I don't want to be a writer after all. Apparently there are pitfalls. Sadly, I find myself tempted to actually buy the book under discussion. Fortunately, there's no purchase information provided.