State of Fear

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Professor S

I see what you're saying (and what Typh is saying), but that leaves us in a very sticky situation. What about nations that harbor terrorists, or like in the case of Iran, even fund and arm them (but claim ignorance)? Terrorism isn't a people, but an unlawful and unprotected style of warfare intended to force political action by creating fear not in a government, but in a constituency. It is, quite honestly, aimed directly at democracy (dictatorships wouldn't care if their people were terrorized) and that makes it even more dangerous because it has the potential to create environments that encourage people to remove their own freedoms to protect themselves.*

In the end, even if you fight terrorism as a police action, you are still fighting a very specific type of combatant with distinct political motives.

I watched a documentary the other week on Timothy McVeigh (OKC Bomber), and it was actually very interesting. First of all, he was the only American I've ever heard referred to as a "terrorist". Which is okay. Equality and all that.

However, to touch on what you said about "Terrorism is aimed at Democracy", I say that quote isn't accurate. McVeigh started planning his act of terrorism to try incite a militia revolt of a country he deemed to be in a tyrannical federal government (based on his view of the Waco Seige - I believe it was).

Also, the end of the documentary really frustrated me because it basically ended with an old woman saying "Americans just don't do that sort of thing" - and it's that level of ignorance I dislike.

But I was also going to say the problem I have with a "war on terrorism" is you can't fight terrorism. Terrorism isn't a country, or an area. It's a blanket name for rebels and militias from multiple countries all around the world who do terrible acts in order to try get a 'point' of their specific group across. "Terrorism" has been happening for hundreds of years. Fighting terrorism begets more terrorism. Now, clearly this doesn't mean leaving it alone will do nothing. But you can't go to war with an entire country just because of some pissed off dude from that country attacked you. That would be like a Civil War breaking out after the McVeigh bombing.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

However, to touch on what you said about "Terrorism is aimed at Democracy", I say that quote isn't accurate. McVeigh started planning his act of terrorism to try incite a militia revolt of a country he deemed to be in a tyrannical federal government (based on his view of the Waco Seige - I believe it was).

Isn't the act of inciting a armed revolt against a democratically elected government an attack on democracy? I fail to see the difference.

Also, the end of the documentary really frustrated me because it basically ended with an old woman saying "Americans just don't do that sort of thing" - and it's that level of ignorance I dislike.

Well, outside of a few notable exceptions, Americans DON'T do that sort of thing. I'm not sure how her comments are ignorant. Canadians don't either, or a number of other cultures/nations, and we certainly do not tolerate such groups living among us (knowingly).

Contrary to current political rhetoric, not everything is the same for everyone, everywhere.

[Typhoid]

Isn't the act of inciting a armed revolt against a democratically elected government an attack on democracy? I fail to see the difference.

The difference is he didn't view it as a democracy. He wasn't doing it to attack democracy. He was doing it to (in his mind) overthrow a 'tyrannical dictatorship that kills it's own people and lets them die'.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

The difference is he didn't view it as a democracy. He wasn't doing it to attack democracy. He was doing it to (in his mind) overthrow a 'tyrannical dictatorship that kills it's own people and lets them die'.

... because he did not agree with the actions of a democratically elected government. His "point of view" is meaningless. His actions compared to an objective view of reality are what should be measured.

No one is going to say "I hate democracy" regardless of their disputes, but his actions tell us this fact.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Professor S

... because he did not agree with the actions of a democratically elected government. His "point of view" is meaningless. His actions compared to an objective view of reality are what should be measured.

No one is going to say "I hate democracy" regardless of their disputes, but his actions tell us this fact.

Saying it's an attack on democracy itself just because the governing body of the country it took place happens to be democratic is as equal a stretch as saying the OKC bombing was an attack on city planners, and 9/11 was an attack against skyscrapers and building codes.

I don't see how his [since this is what we're talking about now] actions of blowing up a building because he viewed the government killed its own people as an attack on democracy. If anything, it's an attack on the country, or those in charge. Not the government-style that country has. And no - an attack on a democratic country, or democratically elected officials is not an attack on democracy. He didn't want to overthrow the type of government, just wasn't impressed with those in charge.

But we should stop this.
It's entirely off-topic.

[Professor S]

If you resort to violence against a democratically elected government (legitimate, of course), you are attacking democracy because you have obviously given up on the idea that the government can change via electoral choice. There is no other reason to resort to such drastic measures in a democracy.

Terrorism is the use of violent acts to create political change by manipulating the fears of the constituency. It is the antithesis of the democratic process, therefore, all terrorism inherently assaults democracy itself.

But we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. And for the record, I did try and get the thread back on topic.

[TheGame]

Do you consider the attack at columbine terrorism? Do you consider Joe Stack flying a plane into the federal building terrorism?