Terrorism... What's the point?

I saw an ad on the discovery channel for a show documenting 9/11 and it got me thinking.  What is the point of terrorists doing the things they do?  I mean did they really think our government would just roll over and do nothing?  Instead we go off to war, which pisses them off and results in more terrorist action (carbombings, suicide bombings), which results in more military action, which leads to more terrorism...  The whole situation is a fucked up lose/lose scenario.  What do these fucking insane idiots hope to accomplish!?

What are their other options? Roll over and take it? This way they've made themselves obvious, and begun an attempted war by attrition.

It's a stupid move by them, and the resulting invasion was also a stupid move. It seems like both sides are run by idiots.

For them it seems like guerrilla warfare, which is one of the better strategies against large armies and governments.  The problem is that it isn't thorough enough.  Just one attack won't do anything.  An effective terrorist organization would have to have strategically placed bombs, going off at the right moments, at a constant rate, without being traceable.  That isn't the case with terrorists, who only have limited personnel to manufacture, supply, and detonate devices.  So the army mentality doesn't hold weight. 

But you should still see V for Vendetta.  So cool.

The point behind terrorism isn't to win a war.  The point is to affect change in governmental policy.  Mostly by angering or putting fear into the people.  In the case of mideast terrorists, they want to get the US out of the Middle East, because the US is constantly meddling in the affairs of the Middle East nations.

And the reason why any smart goverment would not keel over some terrorist demand is because it starts setting a precedent. Just imagine if a country keeled over a terrorist demand. Then every other terrorist will do the same thing to the country.

And sometimes these terrorist are just plain idiots. They want to make the biggest BANG possible to get their voices heard. But like bang its only sound. People do die. People do suffer. But it doesnt make any change except allienating themselves (the terrorist) from public opinion. And thats the sadest thing, to have people die for nothing.

What I hate most is how some people like in UK say "Oh you know if you didnt invade iRaq we wouldn't this terrorist bombings in London" or stuff like that. Thats what the terrorist have done to a point with some public opinion. But its wrong. So each time a country makes a foreign policy are they gonna consider the terrorist threat? Thats equivalent to bowing down to terrorist demands.

Of course some terrorrist are in for the glory. Short term glory mind you. If they REALLY want to go and make a change, go and get a nuke and bomb the white house. There is no excuse even when security is tight. If there is a will there is a way. Suicide bombings has shown that. But terrorist will rather take the easiest targets and make that bang.

The muslim community doesnt help much when it comes to terrorism for Islam. I can tell you that there is a strong majority outside UK and US (though some from within as well) that totally  agree to these terrorist acts because of the Israel-Palestinian issue. And thats even more dumb. And it even encourages even more terrorism.

>>5
one thing i've always wondered about is if islam is a "religion of peace" then why don't religious leaders speak out against islamic terrorists and condemn their actions?  it may sound prejudiced but i have to be honest that whenever i hear "muslim" i automatically think of suicide bombers.

smart goverment would not keel over some terrorist demand is because it starts setting a precedent

This is an odd dilemma. An intelligent government would evaluate why there are terrorists attacking it and act accordingly.

Regrettably, sometimes acting accordingly also encourages them. Take a look what happened with Spain and Britain. Who wants to guess that Australia is next? It worked twice, maybe it'll work a third time.

>>7
Spain and Britain? Are you refering to how after the Madrid bombing, the spanish people voted for a goverment that was agaisnt the war on iraq and everything with terrorism? And how after the london bombings, the UK started to increase their security around trhe country?

>>8
Spain withdrew its troops, and it looks like England is planning to do so. Even if they move them to Afghanistan, to the terrorists it looks like their bombings are having an effect.

So either they'll keep bombing England until England leaves the Middle East altogether, or they'll target another member of the coalition (or they'll do both). You can be certain they'll try.

terrorism is gay

ps NO MORE TERRO

Terrorism is basically a propaganda term and essentially has no meaning.

>>11

Ok.  "Make stuff go boom-ism"

Demolition?

1 suicide bomber can take out many people. Since they have a technological disadvantage, terrorism is effective. They must think life is not worth living for SOME REASON. You can call it idiotic, gay, or whatever and you will see the terror continue.

>>14
it's more like they think they'll get a heaven complete with 50+ virgins if they blow themselves up in the name of allah. Mind you, christians can *easily* fall into the same mindset; so we're not really that much safer having them around (ask any abortion doctor!).

The purpose of terrorism is not so much the main mean to achieve a goal as it is to spread TERROR and demoralize the enemy. 

>>15
The main difference here being that Christian extremism is confined mostly to the continental US.  Islamic terrorism is a problem that affects countries all over the world.

>>6
Good point.  Maybe things would be less fucked up if an Imam, or Cleric or SOMEBODY would grow a pair of balls and step up to the plate and say, "You're a disgrace to our religion."

>>6
The thing with most clerics in the mosques is that they keep on mixing politics in their sermons. This is why religion and politics should never mix in any level of society.

>>16

What about Ireland?

"You're a disgrace to our religion."
You haven't been watching the news at all.

>>18
>>"You're a disgrace to our religion."
>>You haven't been watching the news at all.

Its the western country Imams though. I think we are referring to those outside the EU and US. THose are the ones who keep preaching how these terrorism acts are great punishment for the west.

Terrorism is a necessary evil in order to push through anti-terror legislation.

>>18
I've seen SOME quasi-apologist stuff from the Muslim community on the news.  But instead of condemning the actions of extremists it smacks of shallow defensiveness.  "Just because some crazy guys blew stuff up, don't blame us for it!"

Watch the documentary The Power Of Nightmares to find your answer.
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares

>>20
Completely agree.  That's the whole point of False Flag operations.  Burning the Reichstag, the Tonkin Resolution, Operation Northwoods, bunch of shit.  The best way to create a highly integrated surveillance network over everyone is to create the impetus and perceived need for such a measure.  The best way to become a police state is to attack your constituents.

<Inst>

Which is why, politics is not for the people, you'll never be able to know what's going on. Better to leave the job to the professionals.

yes. we should have an elite deciding the fate of all of us. they will have all of the solutions for all of our problems because they are omniscient and unselfish.

>>24
This opinion compromises your security.

>>25

Otherwise known as a Commonwealth.

>>25

Oh wait you were sarcastic.

1. Create foriegn enemy
2. Scare the crap out of the country
3. Establish Gesta-- Homeland Security
4. Use to squash political opposition
5. ???
6. PROFIT!

I watched the first part of The Power Of Nightmares and thought it was good information, except for the fact that it was always making out that the motivations of the neocons or whoever were good. That is bullshit; they are egoists and shall remain egoists. The powerfuls' ideology doesn't change. What the program talks about, in my opinion, is the battle between two groups of egoists about what is the best way to get power, influence and riches. Seems to me the democrates are just a little more risk averse than the neocons

I didn't get that they were making the neocons actions good, quite the opposite. To me it showed them as amoral straussian fascists who use a moral smokescreen to bullshit the average population.

They said that Kissinger did what he did cause he thought the US would be screwed if they followed the liberal style, or something. Anyway, only seen the first part as said previously.