This is really starting to piss me off, I wake up this morning expecting a lovely hot day (granted, I might add) but I turn on the tube to find that another suicide bomber has thought it would be a good idea to blow himself up amongst some pilgrims in Baghdad escorting countless people to the 'gates of heaven'. This just added to the general craziness from Sunday's bombing in Istanbul (at the time of writing this was blamed on PKK but that's not really important).
The thing that really got my goat with the bombings on Sunday was the fact that they set off the first bomb on a busy street at a time when they knew people would be about. Killing innocent civilians for reasons I still can't comprehend is unforgivable, these people knew what would happen when the bomb went off, they've seen it countless times on the news, they knew people would run to help, they knew the emergency services would rush to the scene. With people dead or dieing on the street, with blood spilling everywhere, the perpetrators knew that ten minutes after the bomb the street would be infinitely more crowded than it was before the blast. It's at this point, they chose to blow another, much bigger, bomb in the same place!
This is a method that was pioneered by the IRA in the late 80s or early 90s (more recently employed by ETA) and to me it say just one thing: “we want to kill indiscriminately, in cold blood.” It's no longer about making your voice heard, what possible statement are they making by deliberately setting off a bomb amongst people why are trying to help?
I can't be the only one who thinks this isn't the best way to drum up sympathy for a cause. If a cause has access to explosives and the expertise to plan and carry out such an attack I can't imagine how they seem to lack the intelligence to understand that blowing up innocent civilians won't endear the public or the media to their cause.
Say hypothetically, you've gone through the processes of making a bomb or two, you've rallied the troops, you want to be heard and you ignore the fact that there are millions of better ways of getting your point across. It really doesn't take much planning to focus that energy into, off the top of my head, blowing up a relay or sub-station or two, plunging a city into darkness. Ok, I'm not in any way shape or form, condoning terrorism but if you can make your voice heard without killing people whilst still causing disruption, than why not?
Unfortunately we are not seeing any evidence of logical thinking here, nothing is likely to change, terrorists will continue killing innocent people, governments will pour more and more money into there intelligence services as well as giving them a freer hand (I'm sure at some point it was just about gathering intelligence but that's not the case any more).
All I ask is that terrorists give an iota of thought to the question “is this really going to help?”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Wouldn’t it be great to get into the mind of a terr orist?
I think its gone beyond the whole “carrying a message” thing..its become a lot more evil than before. These guys have no other motive save bloody mass destruction.
it seems that there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism but, i would suggest, any act that uses indiscriminate killing as a means to another end is tantamount to terrorism...
and once you're prepared to kill one person, you may as well kill as many as you can because, even tho' that may not make your message any clearer or your intended audience any more willing to listen, it will, at least, make your protest louder and harder to ignore...
those, be they states, groups or even individuals, who are willing to kill others, be they innocent or 'guilty', to further their aims are not worthy of anything other than our condemnation and contempt, but in an age when there is little to choose between the actions of governments and the actions of 'terrorists', it is increasingly difficult to see what does and can possibly 'help' anymore...
if only those who have grievances, and who feel they have no other means to express them, were to resort to non-fatal actions, as you and i wish they would josh, to get their voices heard, we might be a step closer to resolving conflicts by talking instead of perpetuating them with yet more conflict, but someone has to take the first step and cease using people's lives as a bargaining chip...
since before the term was coined in the wake of the French Revolution, terrorism (first by government and, later, against it) has been an 'accepted' form of getting things done, albeit at a cost in human life...
the only problem is that the price, or value, of a life today depends on whose life it is: (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/engelhardt)
Sofi, Getting into the mind of a terrorist would be great but I think part of problem is that I don't think I'll ever be able to understand. I would like to think that most these people still have their goals in mind and would indeed stop once they are achieved. It does bother me somewhat that all I can do for the time begin is rant about it....
Er, Oddly, I don't think it's necessary to kill to be a terrorist, creating an atmosphere of fear is enough, which got me thinking that a non-lethal variant would be preferable. Though I mostly agree with what you say (and am utterly disgusted that an Iraqi life goes for $2,500) we should try and remember that the aims here are not just to speak louder but to generate sympathy for your cause. This is the big difference with governments (feel free to call me a cynic for this) is that, generally, they have no need to drum up public support from those they are killing now-a-days.
I think if you look at the cause behind any recent terrorist group, the justification is leaning more towards a 'you kill my people, I'll kill yours' attitude over the more traditional 'we have exhausted all other avenues and have no other way to express our grievances'. Unfortunately it's getting to the point where you can't give into terrorist demands as it'll encourage others but at the same time something needs to be done.....
You can't get into the mind of a terrorist because their minds have already been lost. Most of them commit unspeakable acts out of blind faith which is, necessarily, outside the reaches of reason. If you believe you are doing the work of God, Allah or whoever, then what does it matter how many innocent people you kill? They are completely irrelevant.
Ledgers depiction of The Joker in The Dark knight was akin to terrorism i.e it incited fear in yours truly.. :(
Graham, I believe that’s just an excuse for all those who are hell bent on indiscriminate killings – of course they have minds, they know exactly what theyre doing. By saying they don’t, I feel youre (generic you) haphazardly lifting the responsibility one typically has on their own actions.
Excuse the possible rhetoric but the way I look at it (and thus try to reason it in my head) these people think in ‘extremes’ and see the world in a warped manner – they arent just the ones that are misusing and operating under the guise of Islam, they also work for the government, they live in asylmns, some walk on the streets etc – in short, they are destructive beings, some thrive on power, control and playing with lives but most crucial of all: theyre a product of society gone wrong.
Sofi: When I said they'd lost their minds, I wasn't suggesting that they don't know what they're doing. Fundamentalism doesn't turn you into an automaton, it just makes you believe that extreme actions are justified. Perhaps I was wrong to say that they lacked reason - in their heads I'm sure it makes perfect sense. I suspect that many of the perpetrators know it is wrong, but have been sufficiently conditioned to believe that the end justifies the means. I think it's also important to remember that the individuals carrying out the deeds are usually just pawns - the 'brains' behind the operations don't get their hands dirty.
i agree, Graham.
Hmm, I'm still wondering who killed Litvenenko..
I can to a certain degree understand how an automaton could be coerced into carrying out an attack but this is not always the case. Yes, in the case of suicide bombers, I would wholeheartedly agree that they have been brainwashed and don't think about the consequences of their actions but the IRA (for example) knew what they were doing and we have also seen a number of lone 'independent' bombers, the point is there have been many different types some are cold/calculated some are almost amateurish so you would think that someone at some point would have thought of non-lethal anarchy, it can't be a new idea.... I would have to agree, being brainwashed still makes you responsible, anything else is an excuse worthy of Nuremberg.
I've not seen Dark Knight yet =(
Yes, Josh, that’s what I was trying to get at! But I agreed when Graham mentioned that usually the pawns are used in these suicide attacks..but that still doesn’t absolve the responsibility and the part they play in causing mass bloodiness (with the exception of disabled people to name one group who have been known to be used). But as you mention, it isn’t just the suicide attacks that we’re referring to. Top level government killings are going on worldwide, as are underworld etc. They’re all responsible. That’s why I don’t think it’s a reasoning thing – killing lives is the ultimate power game as that’s the only surety in life, right? Or perhaps I’ve just have lost faith in humanity!
I’m sure you’ll love the dark knight when you do (or maybe I’m just being too presumptious!)
Yes, don't get me started on the disabled thing....
I'd like to think I still have faith in humanity and like to offer the benefit of doubt regardless of the fact I can't relate, it's just my way I guess.
So, far I've tried watching Dark Knight 3 times and failed every time, I'm sure it'll be worth the wait =)
When you said you'd failed to watch The Dark Knight three times, I had this mental image of you sitting the wrong way round in your cinema seat, then cursing yourself afterwards. "Not again!"
Now that's not fair! There are no instructions on thous cinema seats!
Unconditional age, a construction committee turned up to start edifice a confession on the inane lot.
The 175015 [url=http://kamachu.000space.com/msu.html]528016[/url] [url=http://limaimenapolnostu.edublogs.org/2012/11/28/symbol-of-rome-in-danger-colosseum-okoltsuyut-iron-column/]7tt4y9xv[/url] [url=http://blogs.hoy.es/tudess/2012/11/28/south-african-simultaneously-married-to-four-women/]1bu4a4xk[/url] 777328 puerile broadcast's 5-year-old daughter bolstering took an force in all the
gamble familiar on next door and pooped much of each adulthood observing the workers.
Joined spell, a construction masses turned up to start edifice a forebears on the inconsequential lot.
The 597093 885494 175015 408913 [url=http://mios.my-board.org/osd.html]556500[/url] printing one's own in person's 5-year-old daughter outcome took an disconcert in all the
enterprise growing on next door and dog-tired much of each flare of time observing the workers.
One patch, a construction set turned up to start erection a forebears on the weary out lot.
The 9gp6i3gh 291013 885494 [url=http://mios.my-board.org/sdi.html]459796[/url] [url=http://poa7.000space.com/ysd.html]236570[/url] babyish people's 5-year-old daughter as a consequence took an avail in all the
gamble growing on next door and drained much of each companion observing the workers.
Post a Comment