[Serious] Terrorists

I don't get it. Are Muslim Terrorists insane? What do they think they will accomplish by killing civilians? Do they actually believe the non-islamic, or securlar-islamic countries will suddenly surrender and come over to their side?

Do they not realize that killing civilians will just piss off people more? And cause more retaliation?

You know, I don't think the terrorist motivation is geo-political anymore. Maybe these lunatics actually believe the 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, and they're doing these things just for that.

Religion is a funny thing.

(I'll ignore the fact you left serious off... Just this once)

Shock factor. It draws attention to them and forces people to listen.

..and think that they are insane, as nobody in their right mind would murder so many innocent people.

I've never seriously thought about a cause that terrorists have promoted - I've only thought "if nutters like that follow the cause, I dont want anything to do with it".

Anyone seen that tshirt saying "Jesus did it for the chicks" :D

That's what they're directed to do. We're infidels, you infidel, thus fair game. War against civilians has never worked and never will, doesn't mean it will stop though. Good book on that topic is The Lessons Of Terror by Caleb Carr (i think).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

I don't get it. Are Muslim Terrorists insane? What do they think they will accomplish by killing civilians? Do they actually believe the non-islamic, or securlar-islamic countries will suddenly surrender and come over to their side?

Do they not realize that killing civilians will just piss off people more? And cause more retaliation?

You know, I don't think the terrorist motivation is geo-political anymore. Maybe these lunatics actually believe the 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, and they're doing these things just for that.

---

I was promised 144 virgins by god himself. :bigyello:

Blow up Planes, Disrupt Hated Countries Economies, Scare other countries from dealing with Hated Country for fear of similar attacks, Bring Hated country to a standstill economically, thus forcing Hated Countries Population to give themselves over to the Terrorists just to make everything better again.

Thats how I've heard how they think its supposed to work.
Too bad they don't realize,
Insect stings Hand, But Hand smites insect.

Even with Insect Swarms, all hand has to do is get out the DDT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

Do they not realize that killing civilians will just piss off people more? And cause more retaliation?

---

*slap* Of course they do. That's exactly why they do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

I was promised 144 virgins by god himself. :bigyello:

---

Guess you will be the the first man for them and the last.

I suppose Christian Terrorists are allright then...

The trouble is that terrorism does work, provided your stated aim is to destabilise your opposition. It's not going to bring you a military victory but that's not it's purpose.

A group that doesn't have the resources to field a conventional force has to fall back on guerilla tactics. And when the imbalance is so great that said geurilla tactics become innefective against military targets it will likely direct those tactics against civilian targets instead - at which point we'd probably call it terrorism. But from the point you move into any form of guerilla tactics the objective is no longer military victory. It's to cause as much political, economical and logistical damage as possible in an attempt to reduce (and preferably eliminate) the imbalance - and in that terrorism is, sadly, rather effective.

As long as they have us jumping through hoops, they are not losing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

I was promised 144 virgins by god himself. :bigyello:

---

Maybe god hasn't met his lesbian quota lately.

none of any of this would matter if it wasn't for oil....

none of the middle eastern countries that finance terrorism would have money to finance with if it wasn't for oil.

just remember that the next time you fill up your car ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

none of any of this would matter if it wasn't for oil....

none of the middle eastern countries that finance terrorism would have money to finance with if it wasn't for oil.

just remember that the next time you fill up your car ;)

---

It actually doesn't require that much financing. Box cutters, Household cleaners used to make explosives, and some willing fanatics.

I am not talking about the individual scenarios.. I am talking about the terrorist movement.

9/11 may have been done with box cutters, but there was a whole lot of planning going on..

it costs these terrorists a lot of money to fly under the radar...

Just because I rather enjoy playing on the unpopular side of debates...

None of this would be happening if we weren't invading their holy land in the pursuit of oil either. One of the reasons these fat cat oil companies pop up over there and sponsor terrorism very might well be to drive us and our greedy hands back.

well, they don't really seem to have a problem selling us their oh so holy oil....

What else do they export from over there besides oil (and opium)

The holy lands are not the biggest oil exporters. They are however the most independent and that's what makes them look hostile in the Western eyes, thus "needing special attention". This goes on since ~1970.

"Most independent"? Please, do explain.

The holy lands are revered by the oil exporting Mid-East nations. That's why they need special attention. I don't even think 'most independent' is relevant or meaningful in this context.

"Most independent" as in a mentality not accepting foreign influences easily or readily. The biggest oil exporters such as Nigeria, Russia and Brunei do not have international problems because they are so submissive (ok, Russia is also scary, but can be manipulated through its poverty).

So, since no Middle East country is the biggest oil exporter and none of the biggest oil exporters has had a constant foreign military presence for the past 30 years, it is something else and not the oil. That something else is exactly the "do it our way and not the way of the strangers". This same attitude can be seen in many constitutions, bills of rights, declarations of independences, whatever.

Is it not the case that you are talking about them?
Is it not the case that you are investigating both their motives and their methods?

In this case, it appears, it was hardly necessary to actually kill anyone; they've got your attention. Whether or not the capability to excise these actions is still a matter of media report and speculation, and government spin.

Regardless, if I wanted to promote fear, and get people to look my way, I would have to conclude 'Job done' in this case. It is unfortunate that this is only until the next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

well, they don't really seem to have a problem selling us their oh so holy oil....

---

Who do you define as 'they' ? If it's not terrorists but moderate arabic countries why are you persisting such a claim in a thread marked as 'Terrorists'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half

"Most independent" as in a mentality not accepting foreign influences easily or readily. The biggest oil exporters such as Nigeria, Russia and Brunei do not have international problems because they are so submissive (ok, Russia is also scary, but can be manipulated through its poverty).

So, since no Middle East country is the biggest oil exporter and none of the biggest oil exporters has had a constant foreign military presence for the past 30 years, it is something else and not the oil. That something else is exactly the "do it our way and not the way of the strangers". This same attitude can be seen in many constitutions, bills of rights, declarations of independences, whatever.

---

Saudi Arabia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mendhak

Saudi Arabia.

---

Nothing holy there. Or are you a muslim?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by half

constant foreign military presence for the past 30 years

---

That's what he was talkin' 'bout.

In addition, Saudi Arabia also has the city of pilgrimage for Muslims and there's a major event every year. I think that constitutes Holy. Or holy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mendhak

...in this context.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grilkip

That's what he was talkin' 'bout.

---

I suggest you both agree on the context first, then discuss "H"oly or "h"oly, then excercise in some more sophistry and after that get back to me for more clarification hrhr.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half

I suggest you both agree on the context first, then discuss "H"oly or "h"oly, then excercise in some more sophistry and after that get back to me for more clarification hrhr.

---

You're so right. We're seriously confused, we have no idea what we're talking about.

hrhr.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half

I suggest you both agree on the context first, then discuss "H"oly or "h"oly, then excercise in some more sophistry and after that get back to me for more clarification hrhr.

---

So one form of holiness (I presume Christian) is better than every other holiness?

Good grief, and you wonder why there are religious fundamentalists...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

I was promised 144 virgins by god himself. :bigyello:

---

That's just gross! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mendhak

You're so right. We're seriously confused, we have no idea what we're talking about.

---

A quick grasper at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

The trouble is that terrorism does work, provided your stated aim is to destabilise your opposition. It's not going to bring you a military victory but that's not it's purpose.

A group that doesn't have the resources to field a conventional force has to fall back on guerilla tactics. And when the imbalance is so great that said geurilla tactics become innefective against military targets it will likely direct those tactics against civilian targets instead - at which point we'd probably call it terrorism. But from the point you move into any form of guerilla tactics the objective is no longer military victory. It's to cause as much political, economical and logistical damage as possible in an attempt to reduce (and preferably eliminate) the imbalance - and in that terrorism is, sadly, rather effective.

---

I understand that motivation, but I wonder if they realize it isn't effective in actually bringing any country down. They've been doing it in Israel for 50 years, and very little has changed (though granted Israel is also bad in killing Palestinian civilians with their military and more often as collateral damage than as targets).

However, from the Iraq war, it is effective in pushing countries out of a war zone. Spain left after the Madrid bombings. The target killings of civilians in Iraq is effective in opening sectarian civil war (which is the original purpose), where there might not have been as much otherwise.

So yes, I guess it is effective in some forms. Thats sad, Iraq is probably lost, and might revert to a Taliban style government.

Wow, a resurection! Right here in the World Events Forum, no less. I didn't make a serious post in this thread last time, and I probably shouldn't this time. After all, the whole thread assumes that people are taking the long view, and thinking of their individual actions in the larger view of world events. There aren't many people who do that, and there never have been.

As long as they stay in the middle east controlling their own population, then I see no problem with it. But when it gets elsewhere, then it's a problem.


It won't be long before the easily 'propagandized' muslims are in the US blowing themselves up. They're like rats, and it's a problem you just can't get rid of. Only extreme measures can stop their cowardly tactics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

I understand that motivation, but I wonder if they realize it isn't effective in actually bringing any country down. They've been doing it in Israel for 50 years, and very little has changed (though granted Israel is also bad in killing Palestinian civilians with their military and more often as collateral damage than as targets).

However, from the Iraq war, it is effective in pushing countries out of a war zone. Spain left after the Madrid bombings. The target killings of civilians in Iraq is effective in opening sectarian civil war (which is the original purpose), where there might not have been as much otherwise.

So yes, I guess it is effective in some forms. Thats sad, Iraq is probably lost, and might revert to a Taliban style government.

---

I don't think it's that lost. Sure, there'll be more violence yet, but eventually a reluctant status quo will be reached which will be fragile at first but which will eventually become a... erm... status quo. A status quo that is then taken for granted by the population. They then start rebuilding from there and fade into the background and historical obscurity as the next "evil nation" steps up to take its place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mendhak

I don't think it's that lost. Sure, there'll be more violence yet, but eventually a reluctant status quo will be reached which will be fragile at first but which will eventually become a... erm... status quo. A status quo that is then taken for granted by the population. They then start rebuilding from there and fade into the background and historical obscurity as the next "evil nation" steps up to take its place.

---

Is your glass half full? And if so, what is it half full of?

Mountain Dew. :afrog:

You think I'm being optimistic? That's not very usual of me.

OK, forget that. You make your predictions about what will happen there. I personally feel that what I've said is plausible, but if I've made assumptions too large, do point them out. I'm not one to care deeply about my political views. :)

Actually, I wouldn't call that very optimistic. I think what will happen is that we will look back from fifty years away and realize that nobody has outright won a large war since WWII. You really need big standing armies to be able to define victory well. We beat the Iraq army easily, and can't beat the non-army, or even define who we are fighting. Maybe it's Iran, but maybe it's some guy names Al, or maybe just a few different local factions. We won't win simply because we can't find anybody to beat.

There was that old protest question from the 60's: "What would happen if they held a war and nobody showed up?" Now we seem to have the new question: "What would happen if we held a war, and nobody could figure out a purpose?"

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed admits to plot to cancel Laverne and Shirley.
He regrets being in custody as his Stargate plot has come to fruition.
He is amazed about how no one has caught onto his plot to commit global waming...
He admits to putting the peter in peterpan...
Ohh, and Paula... That was him!!! :bigyello:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotLKH

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed admits to plot to cancel Laverne and Shirley.
He regrets being in custody as his Stargate plot has come to fruition.
He is amazed about how no one has caught onto his plot to commit global waming...
He admits to putting the peter in peterpan...
Ohh, and Paula... That was him!!! :bigyello:

---

Do you talk like this in real life too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

I don't get it. Are Muslim Terrorists insane? What do they think they will accomplish by killing civilians? Do they actually believe the non-islamic, or securlar-islamic countries will suddenly surrender and come over to their side?

Do they not realize that killing civilians will just piss off people more? And cause more retaliation?

---

They absolutly realize that and that is why they are doing this. Non-Islamic and securlar-islamic countries will suddenly surrender. Surrender is probably a bad description, more like "get tired of chasing the little basterds and give up" People, especially europeans and americans don't have the cojones to do what it takes to wipe islamic fundamentalists off of the face of the planet and will eventually stop trying (surrender). That is what they consider a victory.

If people in the west were really piessed They'd drop a bunkerbuster on every oil well in the mideast and cut off their funding. Guess what? It'll never happen We love our money more than we love a bunch of so called "ragheads" living in "mudhuts" getting killed by nutcases wearing exploding underwear.

Quote:

---

You know, I don't think the terrorist motivation is geo-political anymore. Maybe these lunatics actually believe the 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, and they're doing these things just for that.

---

Yeah, and my dog thinks it is going to get a piece of fresh poterhouse steak every time I tell it to sit too. Of course, He doesn't. That stopped after I contitioned his body to physically react to my commands under any circumstance with the promise of a physical reward. Pavlov?

The guys blowing themselvs up are contitioned using the exact same teqniques that I used to train my dog. It is the mullahs doing the training that have the geo-political agenda. These suicide bombers are nothing more than dogs to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotLKH

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed admits admits to putting the peter in peterpan...

---

I assume you meant that to be just as crude as it reads.

Oh, not really,
Since people were getting sick from botulism in the peanut butter, including peterpan, I was obliquely reffering to that he was admitting to the plot of putting botulism in peanut butter.

He had been going on a bit about being the mastermind of just about every single terrorist plot/activity since the '90's, I was pointing out others he might as well admit to.


I guess the rat poison in pet food will be his last successful plot for a few weeks anyways.

Unless he admits it was he, and not the Army Engineers, who was fully responsable for the plot to build the substandard New Orlean Levies.