The limited value of terror warnings that do not give time and place of attack

NY Times:

The mastermind of the militant assault on Saturday that shook the heart of the Pakistani military was behind two other major attacks in the last two years, and the police had specifically warned the military in July that such an audacious raid was being planned, police and intelligence officials said Sunday.

The revelation of prior warning was sure to intensify scrutiny of Pakistan’s ability to fight militants, after nine men wearing army uniforms breached the military headquarters complex in Rawalpindi and held dozens hostage for 20 hours until a commando raid ended the siege. In all, 16 people were killed, including eight of the attackers, the military said.

The surviving militant, who was captured early Sunday morning, was identified as Muhammad Aqeel, who officials said was a former soldier and the planner of this attack and others. Mr. Aqeel, who is also known as Dr. Usman because he had once worked with the Army Medical Corps before dropping out about four years ago, is believed to be a member of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a militant group affiliated with Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban.

...

One of the advantages the enemy has is ambiguity as to time and place of attack. Unless the attacker is specifically identified it is difficult to prepare specifically for attacks like the one on the army headquarters. What the army got was not much more specific than the info the US got before the 9-11 attacks.

It would be a mistake to suggest that this means the enemy has more strength. He does not. He is still only capable of media event attacks that have no other strategic significance.

What the attacks do prove that the nexus between the Taliban and al Qaeda is still valid and the recent happy talk from the Obama administration suggesting it no longer was material is wrong.