nope, still don't get it
Jul. 7th, 2005 07:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kittenscribbleThe alarm clock is set for 0545, which means that the BBC World Service was airing on NPR when I woke up. Took me a while to realize that I was actually awake, and not half-dreaming.
Anyway. I understand terrorism, in the abstract. The goals of terrorists are generally secular rather than religious: they're not out to convert anyone, they're just attempting to remove the influence of a foreign nation from their homeland, etc etc. So when they attack, they're doing their best to compel a democratic government to action by hurting its most valuable asset: its citizens. When the citizens of a democracy are attacked, they clamor for change. Chances are, that change might involve switching to a different government or at least a different foreign policy, one that will favor the terrorists' goals. It's bullying, but bullying has a depressingly good success rate.
The irony of it is, they picked London. The Brits are famously sanguine, stoic, stiff-upper-lip sort of people. What were the terrorists thinking? Whose bright idea was this?
Anyway. I understand terrorism, in the abstract. The goals of terrorists are generally secular rather than religious: they're not out to convert anyone, they're just attempting to remove the influence of a foreign nation from their homeland, etc etc. So when they attack, they're doing their best to compel a democratic government to action by hurting its most valuable asset: its citizens. When the citizens of a democracy are attacked, they clamor for change. Chances are, that change might involve switching to a different government or at least a different foreign policy, one that will favor the terrorists' goals. It's bullying, but bullying has a depressingly good success rate.
The irony of it is, they picked London. The Brits are famously sanguine, stoic, stiff-upper-lip sort of people. What were the terrorists thinking? Whose bright idea was this?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-07-08 06:25 am (UTC)Although I'm not sure that this particular brand of bullying does work - when has terrorism actually affected the actions of an external government when perpetrated in their homeland? (The only place where I can think "terrorism" worked at all was in guerilla warfare - Southern Ireland, US Revolutionary War, Vietnam... so this is a real question. However, I don't actually define guerilla warfare as terrorism; terrorism specifically attacks invalid targets. Military and government employees are valid targets; civilians are not.)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-08 08:05 pm (UTC)I think I read somewhere that suicide bombing had a pretty effective success rate. Not sure where though, and not sure if it involved non-homeland attacks.