HLSC 720-DISCUSSION 6-REPLY 1
The thread must be a minimum of 200-400 words. MINIMUM OF TWO SOURCES BESIDES THE TEXTBOOK. Must cite at least 2 sources in addition to the Bible.
TEXTBOOK: Bennett, B. T. (2018). Understanding, assessing, and responding to terrorism: Protecting critical infrastructure and personnel (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN: 9781119237785.
Risk analysis and risk management do indeed correlate and intertwine; however, each process has its own distinct function. Risk analysis inspects every possible risk that may arise. Risk management deals with mitigation and possibly eliminating risks that do not need to be taken.
Risk analysis is difficult to examine due to the multitude of potential terror attacks that are possible. There are numerous avenues of attack that terrorists can pursue, which makes risk analyses very challenging. However, if a terror attack is the most likely course of action that will threaten an operation, project or endeavor, then terrorism should be the primary focus when completing a risk analysis. This is mainly because terrorists goals and objectives are claiming lives, with no regard for whom the victims may be.
Examining terror attacks is challenging to examine when conducting a risk analysis due to several factors. First, there are numerous types of terror attacks to consider. These include, but are not limited to, Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), chemical attacks, nerve agent attacks, mass shootings/stabbings, and/or a combination of those types of attacks. Second, the damage the attacks could inflict would be on a rather wide spectrum; there is a possibility of one victim or perhaps thousands. Terrorism and all other hazards should be combined in a risk analysis if there is sufficient intel that reflects a possible and/or probable terror attack. I do not believe that terrorism should be included in every risk assessment, with particular focus upon reliable and accurate intelligence and threat assessments.
I believe that terrorism should not be the central focus on risk assessments and potential problems within critical infrastructure (CI) assets if the threat level is low. My opinion stems from the general condition and age of many of the CI throughout the U.S. There have been many more disasters and catastrophic CI failures due to deteriorated and aging CI assets when comparing these incidents to terror attacks. Terrorism must be taken into consideration when conducting risk analyses from an all-hazards perspective, however. Brown and Cox (2011) highlight that infrastructure operators have always had to contend with disruptions from accidents, failures, and Mother Nature, but our current critical infrastructure systems were built when the threat of malicious adversaries was of scant concern (p. 202). Private industry seeks to maximize profits, which has led to fragile and weakened CI assets. Moreover, Brown and Cox (2011) explain that the same type of conditional probability assessment applies as well to terrorism risk analysis as to probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) of natural hazards and engineered systems (p. 196). In short, each aspect of potential risks must be equally examined.
1 Corinthians 10:13 (English Standard Version) reminds us to keep focused and determined in this rapidly evolving world: No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it. References
Aven, T., & Guikema, S. (2015). On the concept and definition of terrorism risk. Risk analysis, 35(12), 2162-2171.
Bennett, B. T. (2018). Understanding, assessing, and responding to terrorism: Protecting critical infrastructure and personnel (2nd ed.).
Brown, G. G., & Cox, Jr, L. A. (2011). How probabilistic risk assessment can mislead terrorism risk analysts. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(2), 196-204.
Holy Bible (English Standard Version).
Nowrasteh, A. (2016). Terrorism and immigration: A risk analysis. Cato Institute Policy Analysis, (798).
Rios-Insua, D., Rios, J., & Banks, D. (2009). Adversarial risk analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104(486), 841-854.