terrorism works

[tenacious e]

i am no advocate of terrorism... but how can it be stopped if it is so effective?
European governments in particular pander to the desires of terror groups - look at the recent Spanish elections, a gruesome terrorist act resulted in the spanish withdrawal of troops in Iraq. Look also at the recent attempted assassination of the Taiwanese premier - this also effected a country's election result. Repeated hi-jackings of aircraft in the 1970s (and beyond) lead to Arafat and the PLO being granted observer status in the UN. As I said, I do not support nor advocate terrorists but terrorism is perhaps the most effective tool employed by extremist groups... so, not surprisingly, they continually use it - at the cost of human life. We have to stop giving in to them. If they see they are achieving nothing then only then will they stop the killing. What does everyone else think?

[dan greenberg]

All great points! With the hostage situation currently on now in Iraq, it should be interesting to see what happens. Japanese men and women have revived the original anti-war protest, but Koizumi still has such a cult of personality around him that I think he should be able to weather it, after all, I heard someone talking about him, and they compared his hairstyle to a lion's mane!

Aside from that though, terrorism quickly makes a group illegitimate and provides fuel for their detractors and opponents. But for those who support them, it makes them freedom fighters and heroes at times. Does terrorism just re-enforce existing divides between these two groups, or does it create new (and significant) schisms?

[tenacious e]

hey dan
thanks for replying...
i agree - terrorist tactics do indeed provide fuel for the terrorists' opponents. What I would ask though is how terror can be fought when even the detractors and opponents (of whom there are many)can be found giving in to terror? the idea sounds ridiculous but when say, a family member of a terror victim is asked how to respond to an attack, the human instinct is to appease - to use a recent example: the Spanish election was won by the party who promised to withdraw from Iraq. This is both a local and short-term solution to terror... if other groups (or indeed the same one) see terror work so effectively (after all, they achieved the desired result) then this provides little disincentive to strike again - though perhaps this time in a different part of the world.
Terrorism up to this point (and sadly, probably beyond) has been a win-win tactic for the extremists. The attacks get results: their supporters, as you pointed out, idolise the perpetrators as heroes whilst many governments (excepting the US, UK and Israel) rush to give in to any demands made (be those releasing prisoners, changing foreign policy or withdrawing from Iraq.)
Does terrorism just re-enforce existing divides between these two groups, or does it create new (and significant) schisms?
[/i]
with regard to your question /\ I would say that terrorism, although it by no means brings the two groups closer together, it suceeds in scaring the public into giving in to demands - they are inadvertantly helping the terrorist cause.
The Japanese example will prove interesting... I certainly hope Koizumi (complete with his funky 'do) stands firm. It will be a step in the right direction.
______________
Ellie

[atreus]

In reference to the Spanish elections (I also read a New York Times article about this), as far as I'm aware, the party that was leading in the polls for the majority of the race won the election. The Spanish Prime Minister disregarded the objections of his people and decided to join the Coalition of the Willing in the war in Iraq. I do believe he hoped that it would pay off with some Spanish companies getting some post-war, reconstruction contracts to help boost the struggling economy in Spain (just speculation). The people elected the party pushing to recall Spanish troops because they were holding their government responsible for their actions (which is the purpose of democracy).

In this particular case, I don't think terrorism has had as great an impact as suggested by some people in the media. I think, however, that responding to terrorism with a great amount of force does not cure the problem (I'd refer here to Russian responses to Chechyn terrorists and the US response in general). Perhaps stubborness is the best way to stop the proliferation of terrorism. Refuse to change, show how ineffective terror is to achieve an end.

What are other's views on this. (I hope my information on Spain was factual, please feel free to correct me if I was wrong).

[moksa]

Terrorism can be defeated but not in the current methodology. People approach terrorism from a military, sociologist, or political background. At present the current methods will only contain terrorism to a tolerated level.
Obviously the best way to defeat terrorism is to ignore it. However, in a media dominated world this is not possible. While it is virtually impossible to defeat nationalist terrorism other than through either negotiation or ignoring it. It is possible to defeat religious based terrorism. However, if you want to know how you will have to wait until next year after I have completed my thesis.

[nas25]

Although it was obviously a cruel and shocking incident, I must say I'm pleased (if that's the word) Blair didn't give in to them over the recent hostage situation with Ken Bigley, despite the tragic consequences. When some states begin giving in to demands, particularly for money like Italy, they are only going to draw more attention not only from political and religious terrorists but also just from those looking to make a quick buck.

[annonymous1]

[s]Unregisted User moksa wrote on 01:41, 8th Sep 2004:
Terrorism can be defeated but not in the current methodology. People approach terrorism from a military, sociologist, or political background. At present the current methods will only contain terrorism to a tolerated level.
Obviously the best way to defeat terrorism is to ignore it. However, in a media dominated world this is not possible. While it is virtually impossible to defeat nationalist terrorism other than through either negotiation or ignoring it. It is possible to defeat religious based terrorism. However, if you want to know how you will have to wait until next year after I have completed my thesis.



hey hey hey!!! keep me updated, I rrrreally wanna know.

contact me through the email option on this site please!!

thanks

[Guest]

i am no advocate of terrorism... but how can it be stopped if it is so effective?


nuke the fuckers

[tenacious e]

Well said.

[hr]

Red: Makin' yourself some friends, Andy.
Andy Dufresne: I wouldn't say "friends". I'm a convicted murderer who provides sound financial planning.
- Shawshank Redemption