I agree that Italy is probably next - either Rome or perhaps Vatican.

Attacking the Vatican is a bad idea. That's a REALLY bad idea. No way could the media portray that as them being poor and misunderstood people just acting out. That'd be a declaration, writ so bleedin' large that it can't be missed, of war on the West(which would be counterproductive since some find a way to sympathize with terrorists). Rome is questionable, it might have the same galvanizing effect. BUt, some other secular target in Italy would definately be fair game. Hope to hell it doesn't though.

Italy is next.

I'm not going to specify a target more exact than that, because I don't want to risk educating a terrorist. If they choose the wrong target, well so much the better.

Debka says Italy is next, and I agree. They have a history of political instability, and considering they have a coalition government, the government could fall apart because of a terror attack. Especially because they supported the US. As for the type of target, they could try and pull the same hit, trains are used in Italy as much as they are in Spain. Or they could hit a sporting event. Soccer game perhaps. As for the Vatican, that would be a huge mistake, as Chemist said. The Vatican opposed the war in Iraq, and hitting it would almost certainly tell the world(or at least the reasonable parts of it) that this is a war between civilizations.

agreed. Italy is next, and that is a terrible shame. 1. islamofacsists would not attack their nearest and dearest allies in the war on western civilization, so the french are safe. 2. Poland and Britain are more likely to retaliate by sending more troops to the 'next' war than they did this time... as stated in a previous post, they are both more likely to 'get their backs up' if attacked, rather than to back down like france. E.

Could be any European country. Could even be a country outside of Europe. Would propably depend on which country has the easiest exploitable weaknesses in security/intelligence that are identified by Al Queda. (That is which country is the easiest to hit). Maybe not France. They have demonstrated that they are willing to check vast lengths of railway tracks for their security. Maybe Al Queda is issueing credible but false terror warnings to observe the security response of countries? With these observations they could estimate which countries have weak security and which have strong security. That is which can be attacked and which not? PS Have a feeling that the shift of attacks to Europe (if there is such a thing, hard to tell after one attack) may be because the US has become: - A harder target to hit because of increased security (not so likely). - A more risky target to hit because of possible retailiation against Al Queda or Al Queda supporters (more likely). - A target that is not useful to hit right now, because it might rally support for Bush who would be more likely to win the election (likelyness depends on how competent you think Al Queda strategists are).

As far as I'm concerned, the Pope IS a Muslim. http://www.trosch.org/bks/islm/jp2-koran.jpg So, I doubt the Vatican will be targeted. Besides, it would put Islamic terrorist operations in South America (Cuidad de Este, tri-border region of Paraguay, Argentina, and Brazil) at risk from several hundred million angry Latin American Catholics, not to mention the rest of the world. My best guess - Poland is the next target.

Poland is further from Muslim lands, and has a lower population of Muslims than Italy. I think it will be hit, but not the Vatican. I think AQ is smart enough not to do that. And as for the Pope kissing the Koran, I would like to think that the senility was kicking in there. I suspect that the next Pope won't do the same thing...

If a Christian (the pope) kisses the Koran does that desecrate the Koran?