Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is terrorism going to be the defining issue of the next election?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    I'll see your "retired CIA analyst" and raise you "former Vice Chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Council" whom spoke to our local "political action group" a couple of nights ago and while he echoed much of what you post, his assessment is that "terrorism"(Islamic Jihad) has become a greater threat in the past eight years than it was just after 9/11/2001. Due largely to mostly defensive(containment) posture of current (non)Leadership( )

    http://worldsodangerous.com/
    I imagine this threat increase is tied very much into the rise of ISIS and it's conventional military strength as opposed to terrorism as a force of suicide bombers and gunmen.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
      I imagine this threat increase is tied very much into the rise of ISIS and it's conventional military strength as opposed to terrorism as a force of suicide bombers and gunmen.
      Actually is tied into, or manifested, by both.

      ISIS/ISIL/IS is just re-branding of the same agenda of the past 1400 years. It operates under other names as well, which could be thought of as subsidiaries or affiliated companies of a larger "corporation" (to use one form of metaphor). Fundamental Islamic Jihad is very asymmetrical and multi-task/functional oriented, multi-leveled/faceted in organization.

      But as we see here, many imagine many things, not always factual.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
        Actually is tied into, or manifested, by both.

        ISIS/ISIL/IS is just re-branding of the same agenda of the past 1400 years. It operates under other names as well, which could be thought of as subsidiaries or affiliated companies of a larger "corporation" (to use one form of metaphor). Fundamental Islamic Jihad is very asymmetrical and multi-task/functional oriented, multi-leveled/faceted in organization.

        But as we see here, many imagine many things, not always factual.
        I was speaking more in terms of real capability, that the military strength of ISIS and its holding on of actual territory in the middle of the Middle East has helped boost its threat capabilities because it now represented something more than just mere suicide bombers.

        That also allows it to operate as a helpful base (and training school) for interested franchise partners (to keep the metaphor going).

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
          I was speaking more in terms of real capability, that the military strength of ISIS and its holding on of actual territory in the middle of the Middle East has helped boost its threat capabilities because it now represented something more than just mere suicide bombers.

          That also allows it to operate as a helpful base (and training school) for interested franchise partners (to keep the metaphor going).
          Right, what happened in Orlando wasn't real.

          That jihadist shooter didn't need to travel to the IS to get training or ideological motivation. Nor have those whom engaged in similar before the IS came into existence.

          Like too many, you seem to be looking at this with conventional eyes and applying a secular mindset to analysis.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
            Right, what happened in Orlando wasn't real.
            How can you claim it wasn't real? It's pretty well documented.

            That jihadist shooter didn't need to travel to the IS to get training or ideological motivation. Nor have those whom engaged in similar before the IS came into existence.
            Nobody has to get training.

            Those who do get training and external support, or those who work directly within a terrorist organization are just responsible for the most deadly and effective terrorist attacks in history.

            But yes, not every terrorist does so.

            Like too many, you seem to be looking at this with conventional eyes and applying a secular mindset to analysis.
            I didn't know analyzing military strength, weighing strategic and logistic considerations, and using probability-based risk assessments were secular institutions.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
              Right, what happened in Orlando wasn't real.

              That jihadist shooter didn't need to travel to the IS to get training or ideological motivation. Nor have those whom engaged in similar before the IS came into existence.

              Like too many, you seem to be looking at this with conventional eyes and applying a secular mindset to analysis.

              Come on now, USA is notorious from mass shootings. And let's not forget Breivik, our heroic crusaders who without any kind of help just managed to kill over 70 and injure hundreds of people. Would it make any different if he had sworn it in the name of ISIS instead of Templars? Not to me. To you it does, but the why eludes me.
              Wisdom is personal

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                How can you claim it wasn't real? It's pretty well documented.



                Nobody has to get training.

                Those who do get training and external support, or those who work directly within a terrorist organization are just responsible for the most deadly and effective terrorist attacks in history.

                But yes, not every terrorist does so.



                I didn't know analyzing military strength, weighing strategic and logistic considerations, and using probability-based risk assessments were secular institutions.
                Jeez "Derek", do I have to use this with you.?

                I would think that shooting 49 dead and 53 wounded by one lone gunman might be "real capability". Read your #33 above. You act like until one of scores of Islamic Jihad orgs. grabbed some turf they can barely maintain as a functioning "state" there was nothing happening other than inconsequential "suicide bombings" (victims of such might dispute how inconsequential ).

                When you overlook the religious motivations than what you listed are secular approaches.

                Related to that is the false perception that anytime a newly named Jihadi org. pops up it is some isolated entity that fully embodies the threat and once defeated we've "won". We are dealing with an ideological "hydra" manifesting itself in many guises. That and a couple other basic concepts are what I've tried to get through with this thread;

                Islam - Jihad - GWOT
                http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...ad.php?t=55135

                ...started several years ago and with a rather impressive view number, given the low level of posting activity.

                BTW, your "link" doesn't say anything about training and support sources, just "ideology".

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Karri View Post
                  Because it is not a new kind of enemy, it just has more media coverage. It's a new boogeyman for sure, but that doesn't mean a thing.
                  No, Karri. Now we have the internet warrior and his mentor. He's on his own, but he's still a player. Boogeyman, no. You can't boogey with the boogeyman, he isn't real.

                  But this new enemy, capable of projecting power across the globe, influencing these attacks everywhere, can be dealt with.

                  Folks just need to take their heads out of the sand.

                  You'd do well to remember and understand the age old American motto of "the world doesn't owe you anything". Not money, not food, not morals, and not security.
                  Owes? What a strange narrative.
                  ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                  BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                  BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    EXCERPTS:
                    How’d you like to be running a presidential campaign dependent on Muslims not acting up again between now and Nov. 8? It’s getting awfully hard for the media to keep being indignant about Trump’s proposed Muslim ban, as long as Muslims keep blowing things up and shooting people.

                    I’m assuming here that The Washington Post has not already ruled the Muslims who blew up the Istanbul Airport to be self-hating gays infected by America’s culture of homophobia.

                    It turns out, Omar Mateen, the Orlando nightclub shooter, also wasn’t a self-hating gay, despite media excitement over that rumor. The FBI has now run down every alleged gay partner of Omar’s, searched his phone and computers, and the alleged gay lovers either had the wrong guy or were lying, and there’s no evidence he was on any gay websites or apps.
                    ...
                    After the July 7, 2005, London subway bombing by Muslim terrorists that killed 52 people, the British MI5 undertook its own highly sophisticated study, examining hundreds of cases. But the UK’s security agency discovered that terrorists are a wildly diverse lot. They worshipped at a variety of different mosques, for example.

                    Some terrorists were very religious Muslims and some barely practicing. Most were men, but some were women. There were young and old terrorists, highly educated as well as uneducated, some loners and some married with children.

                    So, according to MI5, the predictive power of every factor is very low — other than: Is a Muslim.

                    The researchers claimed their work would “challenge the stereotypes” about who becomes a terrorist, but it pretty much confirmed mine.

                    ...
                    http://humanevents.com/2016/06/29/th...tm_campaign=nl

                    In DoD's list above, the overwhelming majority of "political ideology" is "Islamic Extremism"
                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...rorist_attacks

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      In all fairness it wasn't debunked "long ago". Still, the Feds reported that there is zero evidence that he was gay after looking into it, which was a story thread picked up early on that certainly lingered until the FBI said otherwise.

                      If you're still holding on to the gay excuse, you're grasping at straws.
                      ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                      BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                      BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                        Jeez "Derek", do I have to use this with you.?
                        It can help. Though not when wrongly suggesting someone else was claiming the attack in Orlando "wasn't real."

                        I would think that shooting 49 dead and 53 wounded by one lone gunman might be "real capability". Read your #33 above. You act like until one of scores of Islamic Jihad orgs. grabbed some turf they can barely maintain as a functioning "state" there was nothing happening other than inconsequential "suicide bombings" (victims of such might dispute how inconsequential ).
                        The killing was a tragedy, but it's the lethal equivalent of winning the lottery. I'm not about to stop going to my local gay club because I'm afraid of terrorists, Islamic or not. Are you?

                        When you overlook the religious motivations than what you listed are secular approaches.
                        But I haven't. I just don't stop at religion when assessing risk and capability.

                        Related to that is the false perception that anytime a newly named Jihadi org. pops up it is some isolated entity that fully embodies the threat and once defeated we've "won". We are dealing with an ideological "hydra" manifesting itself in many guises. That and a couple other basic concepts are what I've tried to get through with this thread;

                        Islam - Jihad - GWOT
                        http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...ad.php?t=55135

                        ...started several years ago and with a rather impressive view number, given the low level of posting activity.
                        We are discussing two different things then.

                        I am looking at terrorism, specifically of the Islamic variety, in the guise of "is this a relative threat to me or the American public?"

                        Which is a resounding no. Now this does depend on putting things into relative context, since anything that increases your chances of death can be called a risk or a threat, but that's why using that dreaded statistics helps shed light on the situation.

                        Roughly speaking, you:
                        • have a one in 20 million chance of being killed in a terrorist attack.
                        • have a one in 2.1 million chance of being killed by a bear at Yellowstone.
                        • have a one in 47,718 chance of being killed in a car accident.


                        Terrorism is less a threat to American lives than bears, much less automobiles. But the truth is generally banal and prosaic, while terrorism is exciting and flashy.

                        To put it another way, if you could wish to either never die in a car accident, or never die in a terrorist attack, which wish is more likely to extend your life? How about between drowning and terrorists? Falling down and terrorists? House fire and terrorists?

                        BTW, your "link" doesn't say anything about training and support sources, just "ideology".
                        You have to take the extra step of clicking on each attack to see who was responsible. Spoiler: there aren't very many conducted by lone-wolf operatives outside of a traditional support structure.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                          If you're still holding on to the gay excuse, you're grasping at straws.
                          I'm not.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                            ...

                            Roughly speaking, you:
                            [LIST][*]have a one in 20 million chance of being killed in a terrorist attack.

                            ...
                            Not sure where you get these stats, but try this;
                            USA population @ 320,000,000
                            Divide by you 1 in 20,000,000
                            and you get 16.

                            Sounds like you might be trying to say that an average of 16 people will be killed, per year(?), in the USA by a "terrorist" attack.

                            We just saw nearly three times that number a few weeks ago in Orlando.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                              The killing was a tragedy, but it's the lethal equivalent of winning the lottery.
                              WHAT?!?!?!?!?

                              He extensively studied his target, he prepared and executed a well thought out plan.

                              I'm not about to stop going to my local gay club because I'm afraid of terrorists, Islamic or not. Are you?
                              That's fine, good for you.

                              But I haven't. I just don't stop at religion when assessing risk and capability.
                              Nor do I. And stop thinking of islam as a religion.

                              And try to accept that multiple, completely unassociated risks can occur at the same time, and they require completely different solutions.
                              ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                              BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                              BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Terrorism is the new Oogie Boogie that keeps us afraid and distant from the real and fundamental problems.
                                Everybody knows that the future of humankind resides in children 's education but it is much more boring than a good old and unfounded fear that allows our dear leaders to do what they want while we're frightened.
                                That rug really tied the room together

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X