The Long Term Threat From Terrorism

[Moderate Centrist]

It is important to keep things in perspective when speaking about terrorism and the terrorist threat.

Terrorism is fundamentally a tool of the weak. While causing panic, pain, suffering and chaos it's concrete achievements are very questionable. One of the main reasons being is that governments rarely, if ever, give in to their demands

There is no way for terrorists to bring down the western democratically elected governments. I doubt they would even be able to bring about the kind of change they seek in some of the less stable/non-democratic countries.

We must also keep in mind the damage they can inflict - the 9/11 was spectacular however the number of killed were quite small ( I don't mean this to sound insensitive).

Much of the rhetoric about terrorism is blown out of proportion and I would even go so far to say focusing our attention/resources in the wrong areas.

Specifically- Russia: the the lack of security of it's weapons stockpiles. This is a very serious problem which doesn't seem to get much airplay.

See the following:

http://charleston.net/stories/040603/wor_0...06russter.shtml

Many politicians seem to suggest the terrorist threat is the biggest challenge we've ever faced. This is blatant ignorance of 20th century history.

To put things in perspective try reading Edward Teller's "The Legacy of Hiroshima" which was written during the cold war. In it he talks of preparing for nuclear attack in which millions, perhaps as many as a hundred million people would die. This was the thinking at that time.

To get to the point I think 9/11 has provided governments around the world with the rational to develop new weapons, increase military spending and perhaps adopt Pre-emption as essential to their foreign policy.

It is here where real trouble may be found, especially amoung states with shaky relations. Issues like the SALT and Missile Shields, although discussed in the context of terrorism, will have the most impact on relations between states.

I've posted another topic on Japan where there are some small rumblings of this nature in Asia. It is also in International Relations.

[SirRiff]

i think you are underestimating modern organized terrorism.

if you are looking at historical examples, like the formation of isreael, or northern ireland or chechnya or whatever, i think they are outdated.

first of all, modern technology has made it much easier to organize and carry out an attack. just look at travel, 19 middle eastern guys can all assemble in north america on a specific day to carrry out an attack. that means that local terrorists are not restricted to local targets. al queda is a perfect example of a global terror organization, and becaues of that, ALL potential targets must spend huge resources defending themselves.

this also means that raw information, water systems, nuclear plants, buidling designs are all available, so instead of having "secret" targets that you try to hide in mountains like NORAD or area 51, you have almost every civilian target right out in the open, easily open to full scruty by terrorists. you never know which one and thus need a homeland security department to secure the entire nation, even small towns are spending time and money defending themselves on teh remote possibility they are attacked. this means that the traditional might of a nation is wasted as it must be spread over a inefficient range of area.

obviously the lethality of weapons has increased too, as the nerve attacks of the japanese subway prove. its not hard to make toxic chemicals and release them, and the proliferation of military grade munitions mean that even high grade explosives and heat seeking missles are aviailable globally for the first time in recent history.

you also have the amplified hysteria effect, we are more accutely aware that the end of the world may actualy be coming. on 9/11 everyone just keep wondering what was next? its instantly on every TV, radio and internet site so the entire nation is gripped with fear as well. imagine what would happen if it was published that small pox had been reased in chicago last night. the entire US would decend into chaos in one day, all forms of travel to and from illinois would need to be cut off, not to metnion everyone that came out of there for the past day or two, which could be a million people. why would you go to school in LA is you new chicago had just been hit? and with 9/11, we know that its not just simple bombs, but complex sophistocated attacks.

i think another factor is the middle class effect. when you are well off like we are in industrialized nations, you dont hold up as well. you arent willing to suffer as much. the trauma of fear hits those i rich nations very badly, we dont deal with stress that well. and if we were under regluar attacks like israel i'm sure the economy and man parts of society would crumble under the stress.

that is really the best thing to attack for terrorists. the comfort of middle class america. why fight and suffer and sacrifice when you can just give in a little (relatively), let the terrorists do what they want to, and you can go back to your life? if some guys in the middle of nowhere want thier own country, just give it to them so i dont have to be scared anymore. if they want some prisoner released or they will attack, release the damn prisoner. i really think we dont have the willpower to win the fight in the long run, the terrorists are far more desperate and willing to suffer for thier cause then a middle class western citizen is for his.

actually that was the fatal mistake of 9/11. by coming to america alqueda forced the US to responded to a high degree. they were too successfull too fast. i think other terrorists will not take the US on directly, but keep hitting thier allies and interests overseas and america will not be able to keep armies runing around the world. the world is getting worse and worse every day and civilized nations will withdraw more and more into thier borders to remain seperate.

no middle class kid is going to sign up to patrol downtown africa with 14 kids firing RPGs at them. and no nation is going to bankrol that.

i think this generation of terrorism was just started on 9/11, and not through raw destruction, but wearing down resolve by unconventional mental stress, terrorists will accomplish alot of their goals against western nations.

SirRiff

[Craig Read]

Riff, i would agree, the terrorist threat is very real and they will strike at anyone, as portrayed by recent attacks in Iraq, Turkey and India.

You are right on the softness of the current Western world. Appeasement, supported by rhetoric and dubious claims that the terrorists have root cause reasons to destroy premised upon Western criminality fits very easily with the left liberal media's fascination with anti-americanism.

The UNO just relased a report on Al Qaeda and WMD. For Cdns who don't believe that a war on terror is necessary or that little Canada is safe because we are loved by all, should think again. WMD against any and all targets is an option - and as recent attacks clearly point out, the US is not the only target. AQ and terror groups know the US won't back down, but the Cdns and EUnuchs are different animals.

The Al Qaeda terror network is determined to use chemical and biological weapons and is restrained only by the technical difficulties of doing so, a U.N. expert panel said in a confidential report.

Sanctions on supporters of Al Qaeda and Afghanistan's former Taliban rulers appear to be too limited to prevent them from obtaining weapons and explosives, said the report, obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

"The risk of Al Qaida acquiring and using weapons of mass destruction also continues to grow," the experts said. "Undoubtedly Al Qaeda is still considering the use of chemical or bio-weapons to perpetrate its terrorist actions."

The only thing holding Al Qaeda back from using chemical and biological weapons "is the technical complexity to operate them properly and effectively," the report said.

The five-member expert group led by Michael Chandler of Britain said it believes this is the main reason why Al Qaeda is still trying to develop new conventional explosive devices, such as bombs that can evade scanning machines.

[Morgan]

1. I agree with you, Craig. Appeasement, empathy for and understanding of root causes of terrorism is foolish liberal rhetoric. The following article gives a good historical perspective of Islamic terrorism in the ME. What's interesting to note is that the radical Islamics are outraged by any evidence of social/political progress in the ME, not by the oppression.So contrary to the Left Wing's take on Islamic terrorism being a response to oppression of poor Muslim masses,it's actually the potential for the liberation of ordinary men and women in Muslim countries that the fundamentalist Islamics seek to prevent.

Arab and Muslim regimes attacked by the Islamic monster they created, by Amir Taheri, Nov. 15/03

2. So liberals take note. While pounding the evils of capitalism in the USA[worship of Mammon], it's actually "progressive" liberal philosophy that is causes Islamic anger. Noble goals like legalizing gay marriage and pot make for good sound bites on CBC, but those very types of ideas that are loathesome to radical Islamic terrorists.

Here's another article about fundamental Islamics and their self-righteous vision of themselves and their outrage at things we take for granted - like women having the freedom to leave the house without a male escort. These are not Arabs clamouring for re-distibrution of wealth. These are middle class Arabs defending rigid social mores that enslave 50 % of their population. I wonder how "Sex in the City" would play in the ME?

Islamic religiousangered by TV satire, by Abu Nasr, Nov.15/03 Newsday

3. Regarding terrorists seeking WMD in the past and still working to achieve this goal today, here are some recent articles I read. One of the articles is a chilling allegation, if it's true. It brings up a possible link between OBL and Saddam, but it's based on a "leaked" report so veracity of report is still unclear.

Congo rebels sold Al-Qaeda uranium, AFP Nov. 13/03

Saddam-Ossama Link, NY Post, Nov.15/03

U.S.intelligence showing Iraq-Al Qaeda link, Nov.14/03, Stephen Hayes, The Weekly Standard

Czech police nab men trying to buy materials for nuke, FOX news, Nov.15/03

As well, I'll provide a url that gives a startling example of how the mainstream media[in this case the Washington Post is highlighted], fibs about the dangers of terrorism at our expense.

Washington Post's Nuclear Weapons Fibs, NY Post, Nov. 15/03

[cknykid]

The reasons of Islamic fundamentalism are legalizing gay marriage and pot. There are no root causes that are stoking Muslim anger. Both of you must be on top of your class. This is ground breaking research. People in Middle East are blowing themselves up because they don’t want to see sex in the city on TV. The news organization’s you have used for research are NY POST and FOX NEWS, no wonder you are more up-to-date than prime Minster Dick Chaney. People in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan are protesting against liberal views. They want to keep their women locked in the house.In related news released by Israel army when Israeli army fired in the air on rock throwing Palestinian kids who were protesting the showing of queer eye for the straight guy, five kids died. General shalom blamed the whole incident on the dead saying “we only fired in the air-These damn rock throwing kids can fly and hit our bullets”.

[righturnonred]

People in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan are protesting against liberal views.

So what is your point here, that liberals are responsible for the growing threat of Islamo-facism? Is it your point that Islamic opposition to Sex in the City provides acceptable justification to commit unprovoked mass murder?

In related news released by Israel army when Israeli army fired in the air on rock throwing Palestinian kids who were protesting the showing of queer eye for the straight guy, five kids died. General shalom blamed the whole incident on the dead saying “we only fired in the air-These damn rock throwing kids can fly and hit our bullets”.

You wont mind if I demand to see a source for this "news story"

Note: Palestinian website propaganda = crap