Reply to Re: Terrorism: Who are the real terrorist's?
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Let me windily explain my view:
Terrorism, as the name implies, is the use of fear to cause a political reaction among a populous. It is an integral part of guerrilla warfare and is meant to demoralise an enemy into backing down by making them too afraid to fight for fear of repercussions. It is, however, solely useful as a RESPONSE. It has no use what so ever on a first strike bases.
Take the following scenario as an example:
In a hypothetical guerrilla war, a single guerrilla solder is hung for his rebellion by the ruling government. The guerrilla leader responds by hanging an entire village of loyals -- men, women, and children. This pattern continues: for every hung guerrilla, a village is devastated. The desired outcome is that the ruling government will have to stop hanging guerrillas for fear of the terrible repercussions.
Although it has rarely actually worked throughout history, this is the essential pattern necessary to terrorism. Terrorism is literally political control by fear.
Using this as a criteria, we can come to a simple conclusion: NEITHER side are terrorists. The name has been misused from the beginning. The names I would use for each side would be as follows:
Islamics = Religious extremists
Western Nations = Pirates
The first is an obvious choice and makes perfect sense in light of there actions, but why should I call us pirates? It is simple: We are there for the oil. If that were not the case, we would be attacking Iran now -- they have made threats even more extreme than those of Saddam and Bin Ladin. We do not attack them because that would result in the immediate loss of oil flow from that part of the world. Now: what does this have to do with pirates? Well its a simple equation:
Oil = Money
Those who kill for money = pirates
Those who kill for oil = Western Nations
Therefore:
Wester Nations = pirates.
Note: Yes, I am an American, but I don't agree with what we are doing in the middle east.
Terrorism, as the name implies, is the use of fear to cause a political reaction among a populous. It is an integral part of guerrilla warfare and is meant to demoralise an enemy into backing down by making them too afraid to fight for fear of repercussions. It is, however, solely useful as a RESPONSE. It has no use what so ever on a first strike bases.
Take the following scenario as an example:
In a hypothetical guerrilla war, a single guerrilla solder is hung for his rebellion by the ruling government. The guerrilla leader responds by hanging an entire village of loyals -- men, women, and children. This pattern continues: for every hung guerrilla, a village is devastated. The desired outcome is that the ruling government will have to stop hanging guerrillas for fear of the terrible repercussions.
Although it has rarely actually worked throughout history, this is the essential pattern necessary to terrorism. Terrorism is literally political control by fear.
Using this as a criteria, we can come to a simple conclusion: NEITHER side are terrorists. The name has been misused from the beginning. The names I would use for each side would be as follows:
Islamics = Religious extremists
Western Nations = Pirates
The first is an obvious choice and makes perfect sense in light of there actions, but why should I call us pirates? It is simple: We are there for the oil. If that were not the case, we would be attacking Iran now -- they have made threats even more extreme than those of Saddam and Bin Ladin. We do not attack them because that would result in the immediate loss of oil flow from that part of the world. Now: what does this have to do with pirates? Well its a simple equation:
Oil = Money
Those who kill for money = pirates
Those who kill for oil = Western Nations
Therefore:
Wester Nations = pirates.
Note: Yes, I am an American, but I don't agree with what we are doing in the middle east.
