What comes to mind when you hear: Terrorist?
- Thread starter mrhappyface
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Maybe I should clarify. When I say 'Muslims', I don't mean that I agree with the idea of them being soul-sucking, evil, wife-beating monsters who like to drop bombs on people whilst enjoying the thrill of wearing towels on their heads. I mean that the media has achieved its goal of that being the first image to come to mind -- like you said. No matter what my stance is, I have to admit as soon as the word 'terrorist' is uttered I get the mental picture of a bearded man shouting in Arabic, Urdu, or any other sufficiently 'scary' language.FungTheDestroy said:
In reality, I strongly disagree with this idea. But maybe that has to do with the fact that I'm a Muslim myself.
Ahh i had a thread similar to this.
The O'kane definition is an act of violence which targets innocents indiscriminatly. The act of violence is a strategy used by the terrorist.
There are other aspects too like attacking property and etc.
This is what i think of when i hear terrorism.
The O'kane definition is an act of violence which targets innocents indiscriminatly. The act of violence is a strategy used by the terrorist.
There are other aspects too like attacking property and etc.
This is what i think of when i hear terrorism.
Honestly? Osama Bin Laden but that's kinda redundant so after that I'd say "perverse".
I mean those videos of soldiers, journalists and aid workers having their heads cut off on video... they are by all definition snuff films, a category of film that had been nothing but an urban legend until this particular brand of extremism came along.
There is a pervy bloodlust to this type of terrorism that you don't see with other movements such as the leftist (Red Army Faction) and nationalist (IRA) terrorism that dominated the 1970's and 80's. This seems far more obsessed about the carnage it can wreak and the catharsis of martyrdom than any cohesive political aims.
There are a lot of similarities to be drawn between Al Qaeda and these Spree killers who shoot up a school then blow heir brains out. The killing for the sake of killing then the perpetrator ending their own life with twisted and convoluted rationalisations for it all.
I think Osama Bin laden enjoyed fighting he Soviets too much... I suspect 9/11 was mainly to lure western armies into Afghanistan where he could have his bloody war that I suspect he will drag on for as long as possible. Not because he has any plans for Afghanistan, he HAD the region and could have done whatever he waned with it, he just loved fighting and killing for it.
People say this War on Terror is orchestrated because everyone needs and enemy and that is true but it's not Bush or any western conspiracy that orchestrated it but Bin Laden himself. Osama as set himself up as the enemy of the west and he loves it, I suspect he would have voted for Bush if he had the choice... he doesn't want the west to make peace and pull out. If they do he and his cronies will hurt the west in whatever way it can to get them back into fighting in the region.
Which puts in kind of a dilemma... I think about this a lot and still have no idea what is the better thing to do. To respond to these attacks like 9/11 or to call their bluff?
I don't know... all I know is we have no clue and this is not like any other conflict the USA or UK have ever been in before.
I mean those videos of soldiers, journalists and aid workers having their heads cut off on video... they are by all definition snuff films, a category of film that had been nothing but an urban legend until this particular brand of extremism came along.
There is a pervy bloodlust to this type of terrorism that you don't see with other movements such as the leftist (Red Army Faction) and nationalist (IRA) terrorism that dominated the 1970's and 80's. This seems far more obsessed about the carnage it can wreak and the catharsis of martyrdom than any cohesive political aims.
There are a lot of similarities to be drawn between Al Qaeda and these Spree killers who shoot up a school then blow heir brains out. The killing for the sake of killing then the perpetrator ending their own life with twisted and convoluted rationalisations for it all.
I think Osama Bin laden enjoyed fighting he Soviets too much... I suspect 9/11 was mainly to lure western armies into Afghanistan where he could have his bloody war that I suspect he will drag on for as long as possible. Not because he has any plans for Afghanistan, he HAD the region and could have done whatever he waned with it, he just loved fighting and killing for it.
People say this War on Terror is orchestrated because everyone needs and enemy and that is true but it's not Bush or any western conspiracy that orchestrated it but Bin Laden himself. Osama as set himself up as the enemy of the west and he loves it, I suspect he would have voted for Bush if he had the choice... he doesn't want the west to make peace and pull out. If they do he and his cronies will hurt the west in whatever way it can to get them back into fighting in the region.
Which puts in kind of a dilemma... I think about this a lot and still have no idea what is the better thing to do. To respond to these attacks like 9/11 or to call their bluff?
I don't know... all I know is we have no clue and this is not like any other conflict the USA or UK have ever been in before.
Ninja'd. I've seen enough threads on here that attempt to deconstruct evil and even free will, but concurrently few on here seem so willing to deconstruct the notion of "terrorist," which the past 9 years have more than proven can be an over-(and mis-)used term.photog212 said:
who isn't a terrorist these days?
OT: I think of stupid people...
drop the bomb, then run! that way you spend less time recruiting new terrorists and more time killing =D
OT: I think of stupid people...
drop the bomb, then run! that way you spend less time recruiting new terrorists and more time killing =D