Terrorism

From Campaigns Wikia

Contents 1 Terrorism (general) 2 Terrorism overemphasized 3 Terrorism is not overemphasized 4 How do we deal with Terrorism? 5 What's YOUR perspective? 6 External links

[edit] Terrorism (general)

What is a terrorist?

A terrorist is one who meets five criteria:

1. Is a member of an association or individual not under the command of a recognized military force or nation/state
2. deliberately targets
3. a civilian population
4. through physical violence and/or the psychological impact of violence
5. so as to obtain by coercion what he/she could not obtain by persuasion.

All five elements must exist for an act to be defined as terrorism. Note that the civilian population need not be the target of the violence, but can instead be the targetted audience of violence. For example, releasing a videotape of a police officer's beheading qualifies as terrorism, whereas beheading a police officer without videotape and burying him does not. Likewise, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole without videotape is not terrorism. It was the videotape that showed terrorist intent.

One might ask, what about suicide bombing? A suicide bombing is a media event. This is known to all organizations that perform such acts, and that is why the organizations typically record the suicide bomber's last words before the act is done, with the intent of influencing their own population to fight. On the other hand, the University of Oklahoma student who blew himself up outside a football game [1] without leaving a note or videotape explaining his actions didn't commit an act of terrorism, though it had a terrifying effect. Even if he'd blown himself up inside the stadium, his act could only be called mass murder with presumed terroristic intent, not proven terrorism, as element 4 was not publicly satisfied.

[edit] Terrorism overemphasized

Terrorism is by no means a leading cause of death in the U.S., however it recieves a disproportionate level of attention and funding. Some arguments to this effect:

• You are four times more likely to be murdered on your vacation to Mexico than die due to American troop actions, insurgency, or crime combined (iraq deaths,mexico murders), yet there's not a day that goes by that you don't hear about terrorism in Iraq. And how many news stories are there about murders in Mexico?
• When compared to other leading issues on Google Trends, such as higher education, it appears as if people in Washington DC are disproportionatly interested in terrorism, and news coverage is disproportionate in relation to actual interest. This may be because Washington itself is at high risk of an attack, or maybe because fear politics work so well for the people in charge there.
• A common mistake is to focus on impressive single events in stead of ongoing events, even though, in the long run, the latter have much more impact on reality. A major reason for this is that media want to show news, not some something that happens every day. For example, one is much more likely to die in a traffic accident than in a terrorist attack. It took US traffic just a few months to reach the same death count as 9/11, even though that was by far the most severe act of terrorism ever. But more importantly, 9/11 was a single event. Traffic death keep occurring as they always have been, year in, year out, for almost a century now. The level of comfort you feel in a car is largely due to ignoring the dangers you are facing every second on the road. If we felt the same way about driving as we felt about terrorism, we'd have fifteen feet tall concrete barriers between lanes and have checkpoints every five miles to make sure you have correct documentation. The fear of terrorism is irrational, fueled by shocking events broadcast in full-color TV. Furthermore, fear is a great thing--it means you're still free.
• Terrorism is as old as anything else on this planet. Yet it is used to create fear (not only by those who commit it), and make people accept certain changes in their system, such as limiting your civil rights, or exceeding judicial powers. Politicians and the media give terrorism much more credit than it is due. It is the resulting fear that terrorists are after. The worst thing one can do to a terrorist is ignore his actions.
• Hurricanes are also not the lead cause of death in US, but they got more attention than let's say car accidents. Also violent crimes get more attention than car accidents, all this is within the normal media coverage choices, it also depends on the demand from the public. There's no need to judge media when it is the public who wants to get info about the terrorism.

[edit] Terrorism is not overemphasized

While terrorism has only directly affected a small portion of the public, it has had a huge impact in terms of both fear, and the ways in which people change their behavior in response to that fear.

• The whole point of terrorism is to scare people. If it didn't scare anybody it wouldn't be terrorism. Terrorism=terror+ism. terror means "Extreme or intense fear."[2]
• Terrorism plays on the way the human mind perceives risk. Spectacular, low-probabilty events (like dying in a terrorist attack or a plane crash, or being murdered by a serial killer) seem much more threatening than they really are; conversely, higher probability risks (dying in a car crash, being murdered by your drunken and abusive husband) seem less threatening than they really are.
• Governments are held responsible for protecting their citizens from violence, especially acts of war. They would be derelict in their duty if they did not warn people of impending dangers and share known remedies for them, and take action to protect their citizens from those dangers where it's practical to do so. Democratic governments that don't take terrorism seriously when the people are scared are likely to lose the next election.
• Unlike random homocide in Mexico, acts of terrorism are an organized effort perpetrated by a single organization or group with the intent of influencing the conduct of a nation. While there's not much chance that any government but Mexico's can do anything to stop random Mexican criminals from preying on tourists, there's some hope of doing something about terrorists who target Americans.
• Improving technology makes it possible for sophisticated terrorists to mount attacks that are on the scale of major disasters rather than random crime. A terrorist group that could make effective use of chemical weapons (1915-era technology) could kill thousands. A terrorist group with access to a single fission bomb (1945-era technology) could kill tens or hundreds of thousands. A terrorist group with access to biological weapons developed with modern technology could kill millions.

[edit] How do we deal with Terrorism?

Are military campaigns an effective way of dealing with terrorist threats? What other options are on the table? What has history shown us about how to handle threats like these? And what lessons can we learn from history?

These are important questions. Let's talk about it.

[edit] What's YOUR perspective?

Remember to "sign" your comment with four tildes. Please keep responses & comments in the Discussion area. Perspectives should only be formatted in the way described above.: "I am ____, I believe ____. Thanks!'

• I'm a spiritual teacher in Southern California, and I believe that the way to peace involves finding a way to bring topics of our diverse spirituality into civil conversations, so that we can better understand each other.75.24.182.141 21:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm an engineer from England, and I believe that we should mourn the dead, clear up the damage, ask the perpetrators why they did it, and then be mindful of that in the future--81.129.17.110 21:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a junior doctor from England, and I believe the 7th July 2005 attack on London seemed to do the opposite of its intent: it brought out the best in people and made people determined not to change. [3] Ashre 22:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a student from Oklahoma, and I believe that all the hype about the government infringing on our rights in order to protect terrorism is a false dilemma. The will of the average, ordinary sheeple always overcomes the will of its government, if only at the next election. Compaqdrew 00:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a technician in southern California, and I believe that terrorist acts will continue until it is shown to be ineffective. The best way to achieve this is by refusing to bend to their demands, root them out, and imprison them. Give them and inch, and they will demand a mile.

• I am a student from Oklahoma, and I believe that we must not do what the terrorists want us to do, which is self destruct. Terrorism will always exist, and the purpose of terrorism is the reaction to the act, not the act itself. If Americans and free people around the world went on with their lives and were not willing to give an inch of freedom up, the terrorists could never win. --Bobcobb 17:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• I am a U.S. citizen who is privately concerned about U.S. foreign policy formulation and I believe that we so far have failed to identify the distinguishing factor between a wikipedia:rogue state, which might be accused of sponsoring terrorism and any Western nation, such as my own country, that has forcibly conveyed its covert agents (and later its armies) to foreign lands. Please discuss as to whether such Western nations are immune from such accusations. -- 75.24.106.107 21:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• i am a middle school student from access, and i believe we have to understand a problem to fix it (though i agree there will always be terrorism). the only way to do this is to realize that these people are human, and have a reason for doing what they do. the media coins them as reasonless, evil and inhuman-'they do it cause they hate our freedom' but the only way to combat this problem is to realize that that is simply not true. --Broomfighter 22:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• I am a university student from Chile, and I believe that terrorism is a term that has some political connotation to it. These days, governments use the threat of 'terrorism' as an excuse to conduct violent foreign policies (like invading other countries). The fear of terrorism is much greater that the threat it actually poses, and this is used to justify wars on sovereign nations. Also, terrorism itself shows hatred, and that hatred must have a reason. Western countries should review their relationships with middle eastern culture, and try to fix the problem at its root: if terrorists are willing to commit theses acts, then we have done something to make them hate us. Waldsen 03:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a Nazi and I believe that liberal democratic governments do not recognize points of view other than their own, thus forcing impoverished or small groups of dissidents to commit acts of terror like the tactically brilliant strike on New York City on September 11, 2001.Nazi 19:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm a software developer, and I believe that nation-states who do things meeting criteria 2 through 5 should be considered terrorist as well. Perhaps if we got rid of the double standard, there'd be less terrorism on all sides.

• I'm a computer security researcher in the US, and I think terrorism against powerful nations is a strategy for using very limited resources to exert some control over the much larger resources of nation states. For example, Al Qaida's resources were far too limited to overthrow the previous government of Iraq, but their attack on the US led indirectly to us using our resources to do just that. (I doubt this was their objective, though it's turned out rather badly for us.) I think it's a terrible mistake to imagine that terrorists are irrational or crazy. Look at the Al Qaida masterminds, look at Timothy McVeigh, and you see people who are often coldly rational within the framework of their (often very strange) beliefs. They're not crazy, they're evil. They don't hate us for our freedoms or our success, they envy our power and would like to make us use it in the ways they prefer.

• I am a teacher from NL: One person's terrorist is Another person's freedom fighter.

• I am a U.S. citizen who finds much of the world's reaction to terrorism dangerously naive. While it's easy to have sympathy for people who feel oppressed (and they may very well be oppressed) I find absolutely no sympathy for terror methods that murder innocent civilians in an attempt to garner sympathy or "bring attention" to their plight. I also find it astounding that people and some of their political leaders - largely in Europe - express sympathy and support for terror groups' tactics, since their people have not been immune to terror, and will not be immune simply by siding with the terrorists. I cite Spain, Britain, Denmark and Holland, for example. Terrorists are not "freedom fighters," they are murderers of civilians. If they lay down their arms and use the political system and the media to discuss their plight, they may be surprised to find a very sympathetic ear in West and elsewhere.

• I am a teacher from NL: The statement: "One person's terrorist is Another person's freedom fighter." is a matter of fact. In no way this statement endorses, sympathizes with or supports terrorism. Hizbollah sees the the state of Israel as an usurpator and will "arrest" soldiers to exchange them for Palestinians held captive by Israel. This is part of their view of the situation in the Middle East as stated by an Hizbollah minister in Lebanon during the fighting between Hizbollah and Israel in July 2006.

• I am an Australian activist and oppose terrorism. I would liek to say that most violence(ncluding terrorism) comes from those with the most weapons. The US is a leading rouge state and terrorist state. It adopted terrorism as official policy after WW2 when adopting SS manuels, with the advide of Kalus Barbie, the same as the UK and Israel(in 1949). Terroism isn't new, and is mostly state-sponsored by leading Western governments. It is also a common feature of national movements, from the Zionist movement to the Afghan. User:Green01 8:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC).

[edit] External links

• Wikipedia entry for War by Proxy [4]
• Wikipedia entry for Asymetrical Warfare [5]
• Wikipedia entry for Freedom Fighters [6]
• Citizens Against Terror [7]
• Terrorist