Why terrorism will fail

Terrorism (and it's parent - religious fundamentalism) are doomed to failure. I say this with confidence because I truly believe that the most important rule of existence is "survival of the fittest."

I see terrorism as the last dying gasp, and last-ditch effort of an outdated way of life. To me, it's apparent that as the first world races forward toward a more educated and bountiful future, cultures that cannot compete (middle eastern islamic theocracies and African dictatorships as just two examples) are being left behind. (I really don't say this with any malice)

I believe that the leaders of terrorist organizations see their way of life dying and are doing whatever they can to prevent it. They know that they cannot raise their own level of achievement - and therefore think that the only way to level the playing field with the rest of the world is to drag the rest of the world down to their level. Unfortunately, their "level" is in the gutter. Their cultures are not attractive to successful societies because they simiply don't function well. (As proof, I point out the lack of anything positive in the realm of technology, medicine, education or philanthropy to come out of these societies in the past 50 years) Fundamentalist regimes that keep their populations ignorant and their women repressed are bound to die out because they simply cannot compete.

"When religion and politics travel in the same car, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. Their movements become headlong - faster and faster and faster. They put aside all thought of obstacles and forget that a precipice does not show itself to the man in a blind rush until it's too late." Frank Herbert.

 

I can't even begin to see what political purpose the last round of suicide bombings in Israel was supposed to serve. What could have been the point? It seems clear to me that the people ordering the suicide bombings are no longer motivated by any kind of notion of accomplishing a long-term political goal, if they ever were motivated by that.

But at the same time I'm not sure what you mean by "fail." Terrorism can always succeed at killing people. Eventually, terrorists will engineer some kind of record-breaking disaster that will make the WTC ramming look like a minor inconvenience. Like Osama, they may never be entirely certain themselves why they did it.

 

Terrorism has been with us since the dawning of time, and will continue to be with us until the sun supernova's. The only thing of terrorism that ever fails is causes.

And keep in mind terrorism isn't always a bad thing, targeting civilians is a bad thing though. Remember the American Patriots were considered terrorists by the Crown. And being on a Star Wars board how many of us rooted for the REBEL ALLIANCE? A terrorist group hell bent on overthrowing the evil Empire. Sometimes terrorists like Osama bin Laden have causes that are poor in taste, and they target innocent people, and other times terrorist groups have honorable intentions and have no other way to fight.

 

And sometimes Terrorist like to Terrifey people and say that they are going to use a Nuclear Bomb but sometimes they do not have it. Sometimes they like to hide and surprize people. They will be stopped soon.

 

JEDIZEN-- Yeah, you are so educated, cultured and advanced that you refer to other ethnic cultures as being "gutter." How ironic, since a gutter is a much more appropriate place for thinly-veiled prejudiced.

JABBA-- if you simply read a newspaper today, you would know that the Hamas leadership stated that the bombing was a direct response to attacks and murders of Hamas members and Palestinians over the past week. I wonder how much attention people are actually paying to these devastating events.

 

'long term political goals' and 'stated rationale' don't necessarily have ANYTHING to do with each other. Hamas might have stated their supposed justification, but I think that jabba is saying that their actions have long since left the realm of coherent or strategic or political action.

 

I honestly don't think Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, or the Martyr's Brigades are at all interested in the 'Road Map'.

They're simply interested in the destruction of Israel.

 

GDS said

"JEDIZEN-- Yeah, you are so educated, cultured and advanced that you refer to other ethnic cultures as being "gutter." How ironic, since a gutter is a much more appropriate place for thinly-veiled prejudiced."

You accuse Jedizen of prejudice, but what the hell do you think inspires the terrorists that he is condemning? Any culture that tolerates terrorism and repression does not deserve a lane on the World's main streets; it deserves the gutter.

 

JEDIZEN-- Yeah, you are so educated, cultured and advanced that you refer to other ethnic cultures as being "gutter." How ironic, since a gutter is a much more appropriate place for thinly-veiled prejudiced.


He could've used a Burka (sp?) would that have helped?

 

The truth is, terrorism has always been a part of humanity.

in the middle ages whan an army would lay seige to a well fortified city then they would launch corpses that hadd died of the plauge into the city.

in WWII the American firebombing of japaness cities was another terror weapon.

modern terrorism is no different. it is ment to strike fear into the people and destroy moral. relifious fundamentlism makes it easier becuase you can take an eager young recruit and make him think that the americans and jews are the most evil people on the face of the earth. combine that with the promise of easy martyrdom and you have a huge amount ready live bombs. you notice the leasders themselves would never do anyhting for themselves. if that was the case there would be no suicide bombings. its unfortunate that these young kids in the palastine are being used in such a way.

 

in the middle ages whan an army would lay seige to a well fortified city then they would launch corpses that hadd died of the plauge into the city.

in WWII the American firebombing of japaness cities was another terror weapon

You're confusing terrorism with scare tactics. There is a thin line between the two. Scare tactics are used to achieve military victories, while terrorism is used only by radical, fundamentalist cults and groups of that sort. However, you are correct in that both are meant to strike fear into the people and destroy morale.
But like you said, terrorism is more commonly found within religious fundamentlist circles. A barely noticeable difference, but a difference nonetheless.

 

to me the difference is samll enough that im not going to split hairs about it.

the idea that terrorism, like we see it now, will fail is right. the more you destroy the peace procese the more you turn the good people of the world against you. but terror tactics as we have seen historically wil still happen and probobly always happen until the end of time.

 

FIRE_ICE_DEATH-- Your 'reply' is typical for you and as usual, does not warrant being addressed. I would say a mod might have an issue with it, but seeing that mod has posted after you and said nothing, that is moot.

JEDI FLYER said: You accuse Jedizen of prejudice, but what the hell do you think inspires the terrorists that he is condemning? Any culture that tolerates terrorism and repression does not deserve a lane on the World's main streets; it deserves the gutter.

Amazing that you would say that. What about the United States in the beginning of the 20th century until the 50s and 60s when Jim Crow was the law of the federal and state government and the KKK ran rampant?? Oppression, terrorism, car bombs, lynchings, assasinations and totalitarianism were the norm. Was the US not deserving of a lane in "the World's main streets"??

Furthemore, what has Abu mazen done to demonstrate that he tolerates terrorism? he doesn't. He has taken a pro-peace stance since Day 1. You just make a blanket assumption about him and apply it to all of his people. That's not very logical.

RED-SEVEN said: Hamas might have stated their supposed justification, but I think that jabba is saying that their actions have long since left the realm of coherent or strategic or political action.

And does attacking and destroying the home of the family of a suspect in a bombing attack fall within the realm of coherent or strategic or political action?? Does firing rockets at buildings in which one feels is holding a potential murder conspirator with no regard for the innocents within show the logic and coherence of a nation upholding a road map to peace? Both sides have engaged in bloody, devastating violent acts. Give me a break.

SIRLANCELOT-- Just one question: who are "the good people of the world?"

 

Terrorism (and it's parent - religious fundamentalism) are doomed to failure. I say this with confidence because I truly believe that the most important rule of existence is "survival of the fittest."

Terrorism's parent is NOT Religious Fundamentalism. "Fundamentalism" comes from a series of books called the Fundamentals written about 85 years ago. People have perverted the term Fundamentalism to mean someone who is crazy with their religion.

I have NO idea what an Islamic Fundamentalist is. I know exactly what an Islamic Terrorist is.



Fundamentalist regimes that keep their populations ignorant and their women repressed are bound to die out because they simply cannot compete.

This is even worse than the first paragraph. I suggest you learn the meaning of Fundamentalism before you use it anymore.

 

bad wording i admit, just those freedom loving peaceful people of the world who frwon upon things like terrorism.

 

FIRE_ICE_DEATH-- Your 'reply' is typical for you and as usual, does not warrant being addressed. I would say a mod might have an issue with it, but seeing that mod has posted after you and said nothing, that is moot.


Nice reply. I truly enjoy when people take non-seriousness seriously.

 

FIRE_ICE_DEATH-- Your 'reply' is typical for you and as usual, does not warrant being addressed. I would say a mod might have an issue with it, but seeing that mod has posted after you and said nothing, that is moot.

Yes, I know.

 

And does attacking and destroying the home of the family of a suspect in a bombing attack fall within the realm of coherent or strategic or political action?? Does firing rockets at buildings in which one feels is holding a potential murder conspirator with no regard for the innocents within show the logic and coherence of a nation upholding a road map to peace? Both sides have engaged in bloody, devastating violent acts. Give me a break.


Actually that's justified, at least where terrorism is concerned, if a terrorist is in your family, logic would dictate that another one will crop up. This is sort of getting rid of an enemy at your back. I'm not saying I think it's right, I just think it's justified and I understand the mentality behind it.

 

Terrorism can certainly be justified in some cases. If a civilian populace is openly active in the repression of a people, the populace is just as guilty as the government and thus, just as legitimate a target.

Terrorism isn't just something "Religious Fundamentalists" do. It is something people with no other choice are forced to do to survive and to fight an enemy which grossly outnumbers them. Sometimes it is justified, othertimes it is not. Take the Apartheid in South Africa for example. The ANC was a so-called "terrorist organisation," they attacked civilian targets. But this was because the White South African population was just as in favour of repression as the government was. Their actions were most certainly terrorism, and yet it was most certainly justified.

 

FIRE-ICE-- Was that another joke or have you switched to serious mode now?

 

No, that's serious, you'd have to be blind not to see it. Are you blind?

 

Terror by whatever name is the same
Cal Thomas

August 21, 2003

The twin terror incidents in Baghdad and Jerusalem last Tuesday (Aug. 19) may have sprung from different sources, but as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay noted, "They are a common enemy." DeLay also broke through the fog about the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" when he added, "The organizations behind the attacks will not be tolerated or bargained with. They must be dismantled and destroyed."

The dismantling of the "terrorist infrastructure," the ending of incitement and the election of new leaders "not compromised by terror," as well as the unequivocal embracing of democracy and free market economies were all conditions laid down by President George Bush on June 24, 2002, if the Palestinian side wanted American support for the creation of its own state. Not one of those conditions has been fulfilled, but the United States continues to pressure Israel to give more, thus encouraging terrorists to kill more. Why compromise when your murderous policies are working?

Former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft repeats the miscalculation of those who support the "road map" when he writes in the Aug. 20 Washington Post that the Israelis and Palestinians must take steps "in parallel, rather than sequentially, in order to increase the prospects for building and sustaining momentum." Otherwise, he says, there will be "renewed violence."

Whatever is he talking about? Violence as an instrument of policy by the Palestinian side has not stopped. It has ebbed and flowed as a strategy for extracting the maximum possible concessions from the Israeli and American sides before the coming all-out war to eliminate Israel. Any "cessations" are pauses that the terrorists use to rearm. Despite all of the gestures and hand-wringing by well-meaning Westerners, eradication of Israel has been the objective of the Palestinians and the Arab states since modern Israel's creation in 1948. Nothing that Israel's enemies have said and done in the last 55 years has shown they've changed their minds.

In fact, a strong case can be made that all of the pressure on Israel for "goodwill gestures," "confidence-building measures" and other wishful thinking has contributed to terrorism, not diminished it.

Over the last decade, 1,300 Israelis have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists, according to official Israeli count. That is proportional to 60,000 dead Americans. When 3,000 Americans were murdered on 9/11, the United States declared its intention to conduct a "war on terror" and dismantle terrorism's infrastructure in Afghanistan, Iraq and anywhere else that threatens American lives and interests. If that is a proper objective for the United States - and it is - why isn't it proper for Israel, whose very existence is threatened?

It does no good to pressure Israel to "do more" while allowing the Palestinian side to get away with doing less. Statements condemning Tuesday's bus bombing in Jerusalem by the Palestinian "prime minister," Abu Mazen (a.k.a. Mahmoud Abbas), are insufficient, especially when it has been Mazen who has shown his unwillingness to eradicate terrorism. Rather, he has incorporated terrorism as a means of reaching his political objectives. Mazen has been the chief architect since 1993 of the "series of understandings" reached between the PLO/Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas, allowing for the establishment of the largest terrorist base in the world inside PA-controlled areas.

If the United States cares about reducing terrorism, it will live up to the conditions set down by President Bush last year, especially those concerning the dismantling of terrorism's infrastructure. If the Palestinians won't do it - and they won't because terror is their policy - then the American yoke should be removed from Israel's neck. The Israelis know the location of the terror camps. They should be allowed to take them out.

Anyone who believes that what Israel does or doesn't do has any effect on what the Palestinian side does or do

 

That article hit the nail on the head, DM.

But of course we all know that a double-standard exists when it comes to Israel . It's just a fact of life, like terrorism.

Peace,

V-03

 

I agree with your views on ism, but the cultures in which ist groups reside have nothing to do with them. The culture you're calling backward gave the world the decimal system, made advancements in chemistry and medicine as well as astronomy, when most of the western people lived in dugouts and were pretty barbaric. Besides you forgot to mention Ireland on your list of countries that ists live in. Are you saying that the Irish culture is also backwards?

As I said cultures have nothing to do with ism, so they should be left out of this discussion.

 

Terrorism is like an ugly horsefly biting on the back-end of a hog.

I have no use for either the fly or the hog.