Talk:Anatomy of Terrorism
From dKosopedia
I loved this essay, but I disagree with one part.
Attacking Reds would cause American's that support Bush to experience something they hadn't before. They would feel the cost of war - that could backfire.
I think Blue's are a much more likely target. Bush would strengthen his position. There would be a smugness in the air. And Blues tend to live closer together, making it easier.
I predict that just as the attack was on a Blue State on 9/11, the next attack will also be on Blue. SF maybe…something close to our heart.
Spain withdrew troops from Iraq but that did not stop the terror , why ? More attacks were planned in Spain . Agitators called for Jihad in Spain long before the Iraq war .
- Please sign your postings. Four tilde's give your username and the date.
- Give a thought to how people are going to read your words. "Reds" reads as "Commies" to old folks like me. Odd that the Republicans would choose the red flag.
- If "reds" is "republicans," then attacking the World Trade Center was an attack on the pocketbook of big business, and the connection there is to the Republicans, no? As far as I know, however, the symbolic motivation was to strike at something that represented the power of the First World over the economies of the rest of the world. It's odd that the disparity between incomes of the super rich and the super poor is the largest single motivating force that attracts bomb fodder to al-Quida et al., but Bush is doing everything he can do to make the differential even greater. That makes him an enemy of working people all over the world, but a (hopefully) unwitting ally of al-Qaida. Mismanaging the war in Iraq makes a great incentive for Salafist recruitment.
- The aim of tne next attack will not be to tick off the Democrats (or the Republicans either, for that matter). The reason for guerilla attacks don't boil down to schoolyard intimidation. The goal is to (1) force the enemy into couinterproductive attacks, (2) create internal divisions (so watch for attacks that might turn blacks and whites and browns more against each other), (3) cause disorientation, inability to coordinate efforts, and, ultimately, social breakdown. So ask yourself where all these fectors fan out from a single point. Ask where one attack could loosen cohesion/cooperation among races, economic classes, political ideologies, sectarian religious groupings, etc. Ask also what would serve as a symbol for American intrusiveness abroad, either in the field of "crusade" or in the field of monopolization of natural resources.
- What did Spain do to make them a target of opportunity for the Salafists? Could it have anything to do with a lingering authoritarian tradition or traditions of its own? Traditions that would naturally oppose, or be perceived as opposing, Islam. p0m 20:30, 5 August 2006 (PDT)
Sources
Any sources to back up your opinions? Not knocking you in the slightest, but if I'm going to discuss this with friends, family, and fellow Democrats, I'm going to need proof that it's not all simply pipe dreams.
Excellent article, nevertheless, though again I would love to see more supporting evidence than the author's own word.
- Please sign your postings and indicate who you are talking to. If you are responding to the first poster above, it seems to me that he has offered ideas labeled as his own opinions, hypotheses, or questions. The first writer was trying to open a thoughtful discussion, and you are treating it as a debate. Even so, you do not make it at all clear what you would like citations for. p0m 20:30, 5 August 2006 (PDT)
Page locked
Even though the page is locked ... shouldn't the reference to it be for http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2004/11/10/01247/557 without any extra numbers to comments. Just my two cents.
Also, please add Category:Terrorism to the page. Chadlupkes 17:25, 2 July 2006 (PDT)
![[Main Page]](../../../../upload/banner-blue-135.jpg)