Terrorism

[pmb]

Every now and then, I get pissed off enough about the news to go on a ranty tear about it. Read this or not at your pleasure.

I feel like I'm living in some kind of imaginary dystopia that I will wake up from - this is Pottersville or Bifftown or something. Terrorism is not scary. Nuclear war is scary. Terrorism is only scary if you don't

Comments

[flamingweasel]

A week ago I heard a bit on NPR about a eastern european country where the President had been caught in a lie. The populace was so incensed they staged a week-long protest to oust him. I remember thinking, "wow, a populace which demands its leaders not lie to them. How refreshing."

... why are people trying to give the executive branch MORE power

Because the people proposing it don't expect to lose the executive branch ever again, and The People are too stupid and scared to question anything any more. I have no hope for the US. I suspect Ohio '04 was a test run for the nation '08. We won't ever vote the bastards out, and we'll never find enough angry people to get out there and make things change.

My one hope is that the Republicans will tear themselves apart as some of them realize they've voted in fascists, and they lose the United Front Against Terrah.

[pmb]

There will always be random wackos. But to become terrorists, they need causes, and causes only come when there is some grievance. The grievance that keeps getting hammered upon is our support of Israel's occupation of a few hundred square miles of desert - which may be a good thing, but it's certainly a factor here. Once you have a group of people whipped up about one thing, it's pretty easy to get them whipped up about other things. We also support the Saudi government, a government which has made illegal almost any form of protest except becoming psychotically fundamentalist, so that's how the kids are rebelling there, by horrifying their parents with their extreme new beliefs. They don't "hate freedom", they hate very specific things, and can be whipped up about less specific things because religious leaders have gotten a big enough mob together.

Well, maybe Democrats shouldn't have let Libertarians be the lone voices against the stripping of our rights and the militarizing of domestic law enforcement back when the WOD

[pmb]

Right, but they got that outrage and violence from a preexisting mob that was whipped up for other reasons. When you've got a bunch of people bought into your crazy shit, you can get them stirred up about almost anything that is tangentially related. We have to figure out how and why they have bought into the crazy shit, and how we can prevent this in the future. And we need to figure out how to stop these crazy people from having the power of the mob on their side

[roninspoon]

I grew up in the 70s and 80s, when we were afraid of both terrorism and nuclear war. I remember when the Smithsonian started doing bag checks at the door and when Airlines started to get carried away with security. For the record, I found the threat of nuclear war far more terrifying while terrorism was something that was mostly a background noise though. It was handled by professionals in the rare cases where it could possibly affect me, and I never felt like it was the kind of thing that would intrude upon my life, unlike nuclear war, which was a constant threat that required safety drills and warning systems. Terrorism, when I did think about it, was usually the justification for a Chuck Norris film and laughably uncomplex in its ramifications.

[misuba]

Terrorists don't "hate freedom", they hate specific US policies.

This is only sort of true, and to the degree that it's true it is only sort of useful. I suppose really what it means is that if we adjusted some policies, we could redirect the ire of those who believe life in a world that contains unbelievers is intolerable onto some other nation.

[Note: those who read some endorsement of US policy in the Middle East in this message have failed their Logic skill checks]