Roots of Terrorism - Page 3

lrd · 02-13-2004, 07:17

Quote:

Originally posted by berdan
Maybe the terrorist actors truly believe they will be conquered one day and thier way of life is at risk.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by this. Could you explain?

berdan · 02-13-2004, 07:31

I meant that maybe they believe that the United States is an expantionist/imperialist country and the Middle East is a future goal to occupy/control.

lrd · 02-13-2004, 07:37

Quote:

Originally posted by berdan
I meant that maybe they believe that the United States is an expantionist/imperialist country and the Middle East is a future goal to occupy/control.

Thank you for the clarification. I wondered if you were implying defeatism.

**Team Sergeant** · 02-13-2004, 08:20

Quote:

Originally posted by berdan
I meant that maybe they believe that the United States is an expantionist/imperialist country and the Middle East is a future goal to occupy/control.

Where do you get these questions from? And who are “they”?

Had we been of that mindset we would owned/controlled the world with the invention of the A-Bomb.

The next time some friggen idiot tells you the USA is “expansionist/imperialist” country ask them where we’ve expanded to?

I’ll give you a root cause, they are muslim, the USA is predominately Christian we’ve been at odds for about 2500 years. Their ideology and ours is different. They don’t like ours and they’re bent on changing it. Their religious teaching does not allow for “being different” and does not teach religious tolerance. We’ve introduced freedom to parts of the world and that in its self scares the shit out of them. Freedom will destroy their religion/power base. They know it and it’s the very reason they severely limit “Western” influence in their countries and control the media on a national level. Their religion/power base grows daily but the populations they target are usually 5th world and rather uneducated populations.

I’d keep writing but you get the point. The root cause to many conflicts is ideology.

The Team Sergeant

CRad · 02-13-2004, 10:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Team Sergeant

I’d keep writing but you get the point. The root cause to many conflicts is ideology.

The Team Sergeant

I think it may be even easier than that. People need someone to blame for their own miserable existance. How many healthy, happy, prosperous terrorists do you hear about? Even the idiot college children from the United States who go over to the Middle East and work with the Palistinians or Al Qaeda are miserable regardless of the kind of family they come from. They have no purpose to their lives, no moral compass or boundries of right and wrong. In short, their lives suck.

The Jews were the cause of misery in Germany not the Great Depression. America is the cause of the problems in the Middle East not their leaders. God caused the Dust Bowl not marginal farming.

NousDefionsDoc · 02-13-2004, 11:37

Actually, most terrorists, especially leaders, come from prosperous families. Happy, I doubt it, but they are not poor. The myth of poverty causing terrorism has been disproven so many times as to not even be on the table as far as I'm concerned.

Maybe a better why to say it would be "Leaders of terrorist groups with their own agendas point to continuing poverty, blaming it on outsiders or other factors, as a means of targeting hate at the desired group and avoiding having their own failures brought into the light."

Sacamuelas · 02-13-2004, 11:44

NDD-
Concerning the originators of the movements/leadership of the terrorist organizations that it true. However, don't you consider extreme poverty as a contributing factor in the mindset of a "potential" new member. IMO, that has to contribute to the psych necessary to be able to carry out attacks against innocent civilians or suicide activities. The feeling that more is to gain by death of oneself or a few innocents than can be obtained by other more peaceful methods. Do you think it is a completely separate issue with no relationship to terrorism at all?

**you edited that comment somehow without my seeing it while typing. Yet it shows no edited statement. Damn this is tuff to argue with you having supreme matrix powers. LOL

NousDefionsDoc · 02-13-2004, 12:05

Each person's motives for joining a group are generally different. Therefore, I am sure if we take a given group, we can find some that joined because of abject poverty.

If you are speaking specifically of homocide bombers in the ME, my impression is its not so much the poverty as it is the leaders blaming the poverty on the US through the Israelis.

My own opinion is that poverty leads people to steal and rob, not committ acts of terrorism.

Lack of hope and a feeling of being "left out" leads to terrorism.

If poverty is the cause, why aren't thre terrorists in Appalachia, Bombay and Rio? Why isn't there a "United Starving People of the World" terrorist group? Most poverty stricken people do not form or join terrorist groups. They steal food and rob money.

Terrorism is a political act. Some terrorist may claim to do it on behalf of the poverty stricken, but I don't see the poverty stricken in the groups. Why isn't every person in Gaza a member of HAMAS?

**Roguish Lawyer** · 02-13-2004, 12:09

Quote:

Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
Why isn't every person in Gaza a member of HAMAS?

What do you mean by "member"? Guerilla? Auxiliary or better? Polls show that Hamas has very substantial popular support in Gaza.

Israeli posters, please chime in if you want.

NousDefionsDoc · 02-13-2004, 12:18

I mean a card carrying homocide bombing HAMAS son of a bitch, that's what I mean by member. From reports I've seen, Gaza has some of the poorest people on earth.

Who controls Gaza? The radio stations, the posters put up, the speeches in the street? Of course there is substantial support for HAMAS, the people only know one side of the story. Plus, pollsters go into an area controlled by one of the worst terrorist groups on the planet and ask people on the street "Do you have substantial support for HAMAS?" What the hell do you think they're going to say "No, I have much love for Israel in my heart."

NousDefionsDoc · 02-13-2004, 12:21

LOL - you're killing me counselor "Polls show substantial support for HAMAS in GAZA." Where HAMAS has 100% control over life and death? Big revelation there.

Poor people tend to be very pragmatic. I can show you campesinos that have substantial support for the FARC, even after the FARC KIAd one of their kids. Why? They've got five more kids.

**Roguish Lawyer** · 02-13-2004, 12:42

Quote:

Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
LOL - you're killing me counselor "Polls show substantial support for HAMAS in GAZA." Where HAMAS has 100% control over life and death? Big revelation there.

Poor people tend to be very pragmatic. I can show you campesinos that have substantial support for the FARC, even after the FARC KIAd one of their kids. Why? They've got five more kids.

Good point. This is why I like coming here -- I get fresh perspectives that help me refine my thinking on many different issues. I'll spare you the acorn quote from Stripes. LOL

Sacamuelas · 02-13-2004, 16:53

I think I comprehend what is being said in NDD and CRad's post.

I may have mistakenly assumed consequences of extreme poverty that are not inevitable states. Yes, poverty can cause a feeling of overwhelming despair, hopelessness, bleak outlook, and desperation. It is this emotional state and its subsequent effects on the mindset of the individual that tends to enable these people to mentally accept the extremists (terrorists) doctrine. My flaw was disregarding that millions of people in this world are "content or quasi-happy" with their overall life while disregarding their financial condition.

The old money doesn't make you happy argument I heard so many times growing up. I was near-sited and being a typical upper middle class American trying to mirror my beliefs onto others with a completely different value system.

Is that where you guys were going with your arguments? Or did I just dissect myself for nothing?

NousDefionsDoc · 02-13-2004, 17:15

I don't know. I tend to think of poverty as relative. If you've never had anything, how do you know what you don't have?

The people that cause insurgencies seem to either be those that had and lost or those that have and want the have nots to have too (without giving up their own of course).

At the end of the day, the point is poverty doesn't equate to insurgency. I think the perception of non-participation, especially in the political process, is a much more common root cause.

Solid · 02-14-2004, 06:02

Quote:

I don't know. I tend to think of poverty as relative. If you've never had anything, how do you know what you don't have?

They'd only know once an insurgent leader decided to tell them about it, and blame it on the US or some other power.

Could it be said that relative poverty is a factor which can be used by insurgents to foment popular support (if they need it)?

Solid