Thoughts on Terrorism

I’m watching a documentary on the Weather Underground. Very fascinating and enlightening. Very inspirational as well. I seem to always like the ideas of these “revolutionaries”, but I can’t get myself to join them. - Maybe I’m just too drunk, or maybe I’m a wimp, or maybe they’re wrong.
Sex, Drugs, and Revolution.
Human suffering is a bit more complicated than that, but I still get inspired by these “movements”.
Short-sightedness you might call it. Emotion taking over the mind. True emotions, valid emotions, false response.
Terrorism as it is known today was sort of birthed by the RAF, the Red Army Faction, the Baader-Meinhof Group, a German, left-wing, young people group that sought help from the Middle East as they conceived their struggle to be the same. - Wrong.
Superficial brotherhood.
Terrorists are all the same still… deluded individuals with great ideas.
Hey, you want revolution, stick to philosophy… it’s the only thing that ever changes anything. - Blow up buildings, you already discredited yourself. Kill someone, now your madness is plain.
Terrorism seemed like a good idea back then, and apparently some deluded Muslims still think it is, but all it does is reinforce existing structures. It’s working backwards.
You want change? Drop your weapons. Sit down and talk. - Yeah, it’s gonna take some time, but it’s time well spent. - The moment you threaten with violence your voice is as useless as that of a mute. Nobody, nobody responds nicely to violence.
My point? I like revolution. But I’m pretty annoyed by terrorists or so-called “fighters” who have no idea of the real world. - You wanna change things? Do it the right way. Or the left way, but do it in as way that works.
Your ideas have my support, your actions do not.
Peace.

One of the most annoying observations I made many years ago when I was young, was that every belief system, conservative, liberal, terrorist, etc., has at least a few positive ideas that are easily understood. Most of them, however, also have some negative, destructive ideas, usually more complex and hidden.
I agree that revolution should be avoided and used only as a last resort against dictatorships where the citizens have no other way of instituting change.
Occam

Terrorism as it is known today was sort of birthed by the RAF, the Red Army Faction, the Baader-Meinhof Group, a German, left-wing, young people group that sought help from the Middle East as they conceived their struggle to be the same. -
That's not quite true. The history of terrorism goes farther back than that; John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry, the assassination that triggered WWI are just two of what today would be considered terrorist acts. There are two problems with how we are dealing with terrorism today. The first is that the Military Industrial and Intelligence complexes use the threat of terrorism to increase their funding and influence. The second is that governments often use the excuse of "terrorism" to control populations, invade countries, etc. often for purposes that have much more to do with economic control of resources than any terrorist threat. That being said, I have no use for violent acts by individuals, (or by nation-states in most instances), Gandhi, Dr. MLK among many others have shown that peaceful resistance my the many can be a very effective way of making changes to societies. The problem many terrorists have with is that they do not necessarily wants what is best for broader society but only control exercised by their narrow-minded selves.
One of the most annoying observations I made many years ago when I was young, was that every belief system, conservative, liberal, terrorist, etc., has at least a few positive ideas that are easily understood. Most of them, however, also have some negative, destructive ideas, usually more complex and hidden. I agree that revolution should be avoided and used only as a last resort against dictatorships where the citizens have no other way of instituting change. Occam
Yes, I agree, and I like motherhood and apple pie, too. Lois

I don’t know about that, Lois. I liked motherhood because my mother was a great apple pie baker, but the apple pie I’ve had in the last few years has been pretty bad. Even the obviously good things (supposedly above criticism) can be much worse than we expect.
Occam

Someone correct me if I am too naive…terrorism these days is almost exclusively muslim initiated against non-muslim…or crazier…shiite against sunni…wow

It depends on how you want to define terrorism. For example, there have been a huge number of shootings in schools, and other public areas in the U.S. in the last few years. Very few of them have been by muslims.
Occam

I don’t think that you would be wise to include one off school shootings as terrorism. There has to be some component of continuity to the act of terror. Just going ‘postal’ and killing your ex-teachers for failing you in high school does not fit the definition for me. It may be terrifying and/or terrible but it does not seem right to label it as terrorism.

Wrong, I pride myself in being a wise guy. We can’t be certain about the motivations of any killing, single or multiple. Some of those acts like the towers may be only for revenge. I think you have to give what you think is a thorough and complete definition of terrorism before you can argue against any action being such.
Occam

English is a funny language…why is a wise man and a wise guy not the same ?
I think that I would have a tough time with a rigorous definition of terrorism. I am much better at criticism than creative thought…oops did I say that out loud ?

I can’t find the quote, but Gore Vidal had it right when he said something along the lines of “terrorism is what others are and you are not”. Point being, it’s in the eyes of the beholder and nothing more. We consider the 911 guys terrorists. But those who agree with their motives (whether we agree with them or not) consider them heroes. The US dropped thousands of tons of napalm on innocent people in Vietnam. Is that terrorism? I’d say absolutely. And the napalm attacks killed far far more than were killed in the 911 attacks. So who’s worse? I’m sure there are some US citizens who would say with a straight face “hey it was a war against the Commies, they deserved it”. It’s all messed up IMHO.

I can't find the quote, but Gore Vidal had it right when he said something along the lines of "terrorism is what others are and you are not". Point being, it's in the eyes of the beholder and nothing more. We consider the 911 guys terrorists. But those who agree with their motives (whether we agree with them or not) consider them heroes. The US dropped thousands of tons of napalm on innocent people in Vietnam. Is that terrorism? I'd say absolutely. And the napalm attacks killed far far more than were killed in the 911 attacks. So who's worse? I'm sure there are some US citizens who would say with a straight face "hey it was a war against the Commies, they deserved it". It's all messed up IMHO.
You're right. It all depends on whose ox is being gored. But some of us are against destructive acts, no matter who is behind them or why. Lois
I don't know about that, Lois. I liked motherhood because my mother was a great apple pie baker, but the apple pie I've had in the last few years has been pretty bad. Even the obviously good things (supposedly above criticism) can be much worse than we expect. Occam
I only meant that saying you are against terrorism is platitudinous, like saying you're for motherhood and apple pie. Who isn't? (Even if you don't really like apple pie or even mothers, it's symbolic.) Lois
Someone correct me if I am too naive.....terrorism these days is almost exclusively muslim initiated against non-muslim.....or crazier...shiite against sunni....wow
Kennedy assassination, attempt to assassinate a Pope, R. Regan, kill an abortion doctor or two; shot a congresswomen? The problem is not religion as any type of fundamentalist belief religious, political, philosophical, etc.

That is why I wrote…‘almost exclusively’…you give five examples out of the hundreds of acts of terror. I doubt that there is evidence that the wacko who shot Gifford had a religious/political/philosophical agenda.

Here’s the FBI’s definition. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition

Member Total Posts: 133 Joined 2012-07-25 I don’t think that you would be wise to include one off school shootings as terrorism. There has to be some component of continuity to the act of terror. Just going ‘postal’ and killing your ex-teachers for failing you in high school does not fit the definition for me. It may be terrifying and/or terrible but it does not seem right to label it as terrorism.
According to the info that Mike provided, the FBI definition of domestic terrorism fits here. Killing your teacher for whatever reason does violate Federal and state law. your definition ,however fits as well. it is "terrifying and terrible" to say the least. Cap't Jack

From what I’ve seen of reports of shootings at schools, malls, etc. the survivors all said they were terrified. It seems that terrorism is just one more word that newscasters love to use to make their narrative more dramatic. If one were to list the basis for a number of them, it could probably be: revenge, a religious requirement, generalized anger, desire to demonstrate that one has power, psychosis, among others.
Occam

From what I’ve seen of reports of shootings at schools, malls, etc. the survivors all said they were terrified. It seems that terrorism is just one more word that newscasters love to use to make their narrative more dramatic. If one were to list the basis for a number of them, it could probably be: revenge, a religious requirement, generalized anger, desire to demonstrate that one has power, psychosis, among others. Occam
Out of that list I'd definitely put psychosis at the top coupled with rage and delusions of grandeur which IMO goes along with revenge for some supposed slight. Oh, and throw in drugs as well. Most of the murders in our area are now drug related. Cap't Jack

Interesting thread this has become. - One thing I certainly agree on is that terrorists often have good ideas, but very narrow-minded, and then trying to impose these “liberating” ideas on others. (Especially in left-wing terrorism this pretty much amounts to fascism, the very thing trying to get eradicated.)
One thing that always bothered me, given today and 9/11, and something I never understood, is why in the world involve the military in terrorist action? (Bush power-hunger and finishing his daddy’s work.) This belongs to special ops, the CIA, and who knows whom. Using terrorism, which in itself is rather harmless, except for the element of fear and “accidents” like big things like 9/11, as a political tool of control, that’s rather shitty.
And don’t misunderstand me, I take these Nazi fucks, which is what terrorists are, very seriously, but on the larger scale they are hilariously useless. You have more people killed in homicides by plain gun ownership than these people can harm in decades. - Granted, there is that fear factor, and the idea that the government “keeps us safe”, which I don’t even dispute as I’m sure they did on many occasions, but terrorists are just that, deluded nuts who can’t even pull off their own army. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.
Wanna make a difference? Stick to philosophy. That’s my point all day long.