Terror in London

[elfsdh]

And, on 7/7/05, London joins the ranks of Western cities attacked by Al Qaida, or one of its affiliates. No expression of sadness will change that this form of coordinated terrorism has become an unfortunate fact of life in our society

Comments

[muchabstracted]

Why is the window of opportunity getting smaller as time goes on? According to your analysis, I'd say the terrorists would run out of resources. (That is probably naive and optimistic of me. But still, it's my immediate reaction.)

[elfsdh]

Because it's likely that the terrorists are constantly recruiting. Right now, according to my understanding (which is based on nothing more than an amateur tactical analysis/conjecture from the information we all have), they only have the resources to mount occasional large, coordinated attacks. But, they probably want the capability to mount smaller, sustained attacks

[muchabstracted]

Ah. I would actually call fighting an ingrained idea impossible; at least when you are the US and the ingrained idea exists primarily in the Islamic nations.

[elfsdh]

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think any *one* policy will , and, of course, I don't have a recipe for ending the terrorist threat any more than any other armchair pundit. But, here are a few things: In the short term, follow the money. Someone is promoting this idea to solidify their own power. Cut off the money supply, and the promoters will go down with it. Secondly (and this is one thing that is *not* happening), Western Islam itself will have to provide an example that makes Islamofascism religiously unfashionable. Part of the "battle" is for the collective "soul" of Islam. So far, the extremists are winning. Thirdly, we have to promote democracy -- and that doesn't necessarily mean imposing it by military means. The EU is somewhat successfully using an incentive system to increase democracy/minority rights in Turkey. If there's a visible "democratic advantage," democracy will come about. If the West is beholden to the interests of the autocratic forces, then, this can't happen.

[donovanstitch]

Widespread fear is a means to an end for terrorists, rather than the objective in and of itself (their predecessors read Fanon). If that end amounts to specific policy changes, and terrorist acts spur the very changes sought by the terrorists, that’s the true measure of “successful” terrorism.

[elfsdh]

Then I think we at least agree about their end goal. In a military campaign, the goals are to win both the battles and to win the war. For a terrorist, winning the battles means stoking fear in the enemy populace; winning the war means that the enemy cedes to their demands. In the same way, a successful air strike has the immediate goal of destroying its targets, and the long term goal of advancing the higher military objective.

Thank You for site

[anonymous]

Thank you for your site. I have found here much useful information.
Good site ! ;)