Last month, our resident image-breaker addressed thevulnerability of the national infrastructure to both lack ofmaintenance and threats of terrorism. Our experts say thatterrorist attacks are not a question of whether, but one of when.What, therefore, should the insurance industry and the Americanpublic do to prepare?

Those of us who sit in ivory towers (mine is an upstairs formerbedroom that gets hot as blazes on a sunny summer afternoon)thinking up problems and solutions need to address the terrorismissues that are anticipated to create national chaos on the scaleof Sept. 11, 2001 -- or maybe worse. Last month we looked atpotential targets. This month we will address potential ways toaddress the threat.

Terrorism is not new. It is one of the oldest means of bringingabout change. It includes economic terrorism, such as boycotts ofnations with whom we disagree in order to bring about politicalchange. Cuba, for example, has suffered economic terrorism -- whatelse could you call it? -- because the United States wants rid ofFidel Castro. If the change is seen as being for "our side," we arenot critical of it; if it is against "our side," we abhor theprocess and try to defeat the terrorists. Consider that, to an 18thcentury British government, those revolutionary rascals inVirginia, Massachusetts, New York, and Philadelphia were nothingshort of a bunch of terrorists. One man's terrorist may turn out tobe another man's patriot. That is the thinking of many of ourdomestic variety terrorists. They will save the world, in the nameof race, flag, or God.

Terrorism akin to battles with the Canaanites, as described inthe Old Testament, helped bring about the creation the new nationof Israel in the 1940s. Go rent the movie Exodus; it describes itpretty well. Terrorism in Palestine has been going on for thousandsof years. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth. It is a much differentstory, however, when it is our side's terrorists doing the deadlydeeds. Remember, in the 1980s, our "enemy" was Communist orIranian, and both Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were ourterrorists. Few Americans are aware that bin Laden family memberswere guests of the Bush family on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.Bush the First has been a close friend of many Saudi families fordecades. There is nothing wrong with that, but it puts things inperspective.

Underlying Causes

Lest your Iconoclast smash too many images here and get toopolitical, let's get back on track and see what can be done aboutthe current mess. Terrorism can be domestic, or it can be foreign.Right now the problem seems to be al Qaeda. Who are these guys, andwhat do they want? When I was a kid, like many in the early 1940s,we were taught that to love our enemies was very nice, but we werealso taught to hate; it was the time of World War II, and hatredand prejudice were quite acceptable attitudes. We would tolerate abully only briefly, then beat the baloney out of the brat.

As a military social worker in the First Infantry Division inthe mid-1960s, I often had to deal with characters who, perhaps,had been childhood bullies and had grown up with psychologicalproblems. The polite words are personality disorders; the clinicalones are passive-aggressive immaturity reaction. The key tounderstanding bullies requires research.

To understand al Qaeda and lead-bully Osama bin Laden, we mustunderstand their backgrounds. Why do they hate us? What is it inOsama's background that is different from that of his parents,brothers, and cousins in Saudi Arabia, who currently are ourallies? How has this weird Islamic cult called Wahhabism managed tometamorphose into what Richard Clarke calls a many-headed hydra,with terrorist cells all over the world? We need to turn toprofessors of history and religion at universities for answers.(Isn't it interesting that less than 30 years ago one of ourprominent conservative senators, Proxmire, was awarding his GoldenFleece Award to the government agency that sponsored a study ofIslam. What a waste of good tax dollars, he thought. Hmmm.)

What little the general public does know about al Qaeda is thatit is some radical form of Islamic fundamentalism -- Wahhabism --that encompasses not only religious but also political and culturalbeliefs. It is not so much that al Qaeda wants to take over theworld; rather, it wants to purify it. Either adopt al Qaeda's codeof behavior (which would make Oliver Cromwell and his CalvinistPuritans seem like drunken, rollicking merry-makers), or die. Blackand white. No compromise. Take it or leave it. Nothing isoptional.

What they apparently fear from Western society (that's us andEurope) is cultural contamination. Thousands of young Arabic andPakistani and Palestinian boys, whose only prospect for the futureis unemployment and poverty, sit in Wahhab schools studying afundamentalist version of the Koran. They are not studyingdemocracy or human rights or feminism in there. They will readilyadopt Western technology, but they see our way of living as evil.Considering things such as MTV, the wardrobe malfunction at theSuper Bowl, some of the network and cable television shows, ourconspicuous greed and wealth, and our trends in popular music, Ican partly understand their disgust with our culture. It is theirmethod of disagreeing that is problematic.

There also is the suspicion that fundamentalist Muslim terrorismhas much to do with failure to resolve the Israeli/ Palestinianissue. It probably does, and our current administration seems tokeep Sharon and Hamas on a back burner. That pot is about to boildry, and the smoke will soon be setting off alarms. Or maybe anunderlying culprit really is -- dare we say it? -- oil. Nah,couldn't be.

Oil and the Infrastructure

Oil has been a major source of world dispute for centuries.Eighteenth century whalers sailed the globe seeking the marineanimals for their oil. Every nation had its remote whaling stationsscattered around the world in places many of us have never heardof, such as the South Georgian Islands (British) or the Kergulins(French), and used their navies to protect them. John D.Rockefeller was in the vegetable oil business in Cleveland whenDrake's well produced petroleum a hundred miles or so to the east.You probably know the rest of that story. Why did Nazi Germany takeon Mother Russia? They wanted the Caspian Sea oil fields. What dowe think the Japanese wanted in Indonesia? Coconuts? Why has theWest taken such a keen interest in the Mideast? You guessed it.Oil.

We are told that no nation, including Western Europe's, consumesas much oil as does the United States. That makes us veryvulnerable. There are other sources of power, such as atomicenergy, but they have some difficult side effects and theenvironmentalists protest. Once science overcomes the nuclear wastedisposal problem, which admittedly is serious, we will haveaccomplished quite a bit toward energy sufficiency.

Hydroelectric power is another good source but, because we useso much hydrocarbon fuel, we have created global weather changes,hence rainfall to engorge the rivers that feed the reservoirs andpower the dams seems to be drying up. (We have not had a goodrainfall in Atlanta for months.) So, oil is a problem. It fuels ourbig SUVs and giant trucks that tear up our Interstate highways andother roads. I have never seen a highway maintenance crew providedby a truck line, yet railroads are required to fix their owntracks. I have yet to see a barge line build a canal, but one oftheir barges can knock out a bridge on I-40 in Oklahoma and tie upcommerce for months.

Step One: Decreasing Oil Dependency The threat of terrorism willnot end with the 2004 election, regardless of who is elected. Theal Qaeda threat will remain, along with any number of domesticvarieties. However, reducing our oil dependency on the Mideastmight help reduce the intercontinental hatred that it now seems togenerate. How can we do that?

Undoubtedly there are some folks living in mountainous areas ofthe nation who really do need large, heavy, four-wheel-drivevehicles. That does not include suburban soccer moms. Hybrid carsare available, but the problem is fueling them.

This is where government comes into play. All we need islegislation that requires that, over the next 10 years, auto makersmust produce a growing ratio of alternative fuel, non-pollutingcars (hydrogen, for example). Ten percent the first year, 20 thenext, etc., so that, by the end of the 10 years, 100 percent of thevehicles built no longer are diesel- or gasoline-powered.Meanwhile, the same legislation must require that oil companiesproduce the same ratio of the alternative fuels, 10 percent thefirst year and 99 percent by the 10th year, the remaining 1 percentbeing for the few gasoline- or diesel-powered vehicles that havenot yet reached a junk yard.

There is a bit of a problem here, for it takes energy to createthese new alternate fuels, be they natural gas or hydrogen orelectric batteries, or even to transmit solar- or wind-poweredelectricity. That is a minuscule amount compared to what we burn inour big SUVs and trucks and gas-guzzling automobiles, however.Additionally, it is not yet clear whether large aircraft can bedesigned for alternative fuels.

Step Two: Alternative Travel Every developed nation in the worldhas major high-speed rail passenger service except the UnitedStates and Canada. We have Acela, but it is only a few hundredmiles long, only serves the Northeast, and does not really go allthat fast. This is a big nation. We need to get cars off theInterstates and start using both long-distance and local railservice. Each year, new light rail systems are opening in citiesacross the nation, often running exactly where old streetcar linesused to run. Minneapolis' planned opening this year was delayed bya strike. St. Louis, Houston, and a multitude of other cities havejoined the ranks of those with transit systems that will getbusiness and tourist travelers from airports to wherever theyreasonably want to go. We do not all need to rent cars.

Last month, we noted that the railroads are private. They do notneed or want passenger trains tying up their freight lines; theyare too busy for that. So, where do we build these new high-speedpassenger lines, and how do we operate them? My suggestion ismag-lev, a system designed decades ago that uses electromagneticpower to move the train on a levitated cushion quickly over aconcrete and metal pad. This track could be elevated on atripod-type rack running above existing CSX, NS, KCS/CN, BNSF, orUP tracks, with no grade crossings. At speeds up to 350 miles perhour, one could go from New York to Chicago almost as fast as byairline, departing and arriving downtown, not 25 miles outside thecity.

But, how could we get Americans, who are the mostindividualistic-minded people on earth, to surrender their SUVs?One suggestion is to raise gas prices through taxes to levelscomparable to those in Europe, where the tax money goes to buildthose high-speed rail lines. Ouch! Another is to add a surcharge tothe auto insurance on the gas-guzzling vehicles, but provide alarge discount for those who use public transportation forcommuting or long-distance trips, and for truck lines that use raillines for their long distance routes. Some truck lines already dothat. Next time you are stopped for a train, look at the names onthe trailers or containers mounted on those rail cars.

Step Three: Alternative Power Fossil fuels, oil, coal, andnatural gas supply most of our electric power today. They aretransported by rail, pipeline, barge, and truck. That is a big partof the transportation business and commerce. It will be quite awhile before we could become less reliant on these fuels but,nevertheless, that needs to be an objective. There are many othersources of power: atomic, wind, solar, hydroelectric, and probablysome we have not invented yet. It was only a hundred years ago thatwe invented the airplane; a hundred and fifty, the telegraph; and200 years ago only Ben Franklin and a handful of others even knewabout electricity. Our universities and research institutions needto keep busy.

The power systems of the future may not be at all like those wehave today. Perhaps every building will have a solar generator onthe roof, or a windmill up there to crank out power to operate thehome or building. That would eliminate things such as the powergrid, which is vulnerable to terrorist attack. Life will be verydifferent by the end of the current century, and some of us (notme, I'm sure, but maybe some children I know) will be there to makeit happen and see it work.

Step Four: People As we noted last month, one problem in oursecurity has been that most of our effort has been placed atairports. That makes other targets more vulnerable. As in Europe,the public must be security-conscious. We cannot walk around indazes. Go to any American city and ask a stranger what some unusualthing might be, and the response will probably be, "Huh? What! Youtalkin' ta me?" We must be alert for the satchel or suitcase thatmight just be a bomb, and know how to warn the authorities. Eventhis old Iconoclast can see a purpose in cellular phones forthat.

Alertness will not be enough. We need a whole army of people tobetter guard our borders, patrol our transit lines, keep watch overour water resources and power grid, and staff the hospitals andhealth facilities that will be jammed with victims when (not if)the attacks come. For example, the War on Terrorism is producingmany casualties, yet under-trained personnel under-staff some ofour military and VA hospitals. The current military isinsufficiently small. Besides, it is busy elsewhere.

It is a horrible thought, but whoever is elected this Novemberhad better plan to reinstate the draft, and not just for healthymen. Universal. Men and women and gays and puny guys with buckteeth and bad feet. They will not all be soldiers but, for twoyears, every young American would serve as a security guard or anurse or a teacher or an infrastructure repairman -- or a soldier-- at minimum wage. There is no reason that our graduating collegeseniors need to immediately go into the business world and makeanother million bucks for some Donald Trump. Why raise our taxes topay high prices for outside contractors to do the work thatdraftees could do for a lot less money?

A draft would take up the unemployment slack, and corporationswould be scrambling for the experienced workers coming off theirmandatory two-year duties. Some might enjoy it enough to makegovernment service a career. With our current lack of goodteachers, nurses, and other social servants, as well as borderguards and security agents, this is a long overdue idea. As notedlast month, how smart was it to call up reservists who were firemenand policemen and haz-mat specialists, nurses, teachers, andconstruction workers to fight and die in the Middle East when weneed them here?

Next month, we will continue our exploration of options in theWar on Terrorism.

Do you have a comment on this month's topic? The Iconoclastwould like to hear from you. Contact us at Claims, 5081 OlympicBlvd., Erlanger, KY 41018 e-mail: editor@ claimsmag.com

Ken Brownlee, CPCU, is a former adjuster and risk manager, basedin Atlanta. He now authors and edits claim adjusting textbooks.