Terrorists are terrorists because they are stupid...And that’s why they will never win

Yes stupid, or dumb, whichever you prefer. Terrorists are simply unintelligent people who cannot compete with people of even moderate intellect. Remember when you were a kid (or even now?) and you meet somebody who seemingly beats you in everything no matter what? You want to hit them after a while; maybe even you DO hit them after awhile.

This is what happens to terrorists. They cannot compete in any sensible way, like diplomacy or politically, so they kill and attack. They have the passion to act on their agendas, but they simply don’t have the intelligence to do anything about it but fight and kill and cause terror. They lash out for instant results without any foresight or idea how their actions will affect their cause in the long run. And that’s why they will never win.

I found this story that uses real life examples of terrorism through stupidity.



“In 1947, Ruhalhah Khomeini, then a mid-ranking mullah in Qom, issued a "fatwa" (opinion) that made it incumbent on "the faithful" to murder Ahmad Kasravi. It took a group of eight "faithful" to plan and carry out the murder several months later. A jubilant Khomeini told his entourage that he had "eliminated that paragon of impiety" for ever.

At the time of his murder Kasravi was one of Iran's leading intellectuals. A veritable Renaissance man, he was a senior jurist at the high court, a distinguished historian, a magnetic orator, a master of the Persian prose, and a best-selling author.

But why did Khomeini desire Kasravi's death? Was it Kasravi's success in offering the Iranians an alternative reading of their history and culture? Or was it because Kasravi had subjected the doctrine of Shi'ism to close critical scrutiny? Or, may be, a dose of personal jealousy was involved? After all Khomeini had just published his childish pamphlet entitled "Kashf al-Asrar" (Key to Secrets), and attracted nothing but yawns, frowns and laughs from the few people who bothered to leaf through it. This contrasted with the fact that the publication of any of Kasravi's book was a national event with reverberations throughout society.


But history is never written in advance. Just over three decades later Khomeini was the master of Iran, executing his real or imagined foes by the thousands. Kasravi's book were dug out of libraries and private collections and burned and his tomb ransacked by Khomeinist thugs. But that, too, was not the end of the story.


Today, Kasravi is re-emerging as one of Iran's best-loved and most read authors while Khomeini's embarrassingly illiterate books, published in expensive editions by the government and often distributed free of charge, are never read because they are unreadable.


All this shows that, in the long-run, terrorism does not work.

Terrorism is, in fact, the tool of the intellectually lazy politicians…”


Read the rest here

I wonder if the people who just support terrorism and terrorist organizations are the same people that would be terrorists but are too lazy to act. I.e. stupid AND lazy?

Terrorism, a tool of the stupid and unmotivated.

Originally posted by skippytjc
Terrorists are terrorists because they are stupid...And that’s why they will never win »

So how do you defeat a stupid person?

He/she is to dumb to realise that he/she is defeated.

ummm......would you consider forcibly boarding a boat and dumping a fortune of a valuable commodity into the ocean a form of terrorism? if so, well, then, I'd have to say, not all terrorists are losers....

just the ones that hold human life in such little esteem that they'd use thier most precious commodity...their youth, and con them into blowing themselves up in places of really little strategic imortance for a free ticket to heaven!!

Terrorists are idiots and/or meglomaniacs who don't take
responsibility for their own actions.

Terrorist says - '50 infidels got blown up in the train station because
they were infidels whose country dared to go into a muslim land and
stop the mass slaughter of muslims by Saddam ... It wasn't my fault they
died and that there was massive terror, even though I was the one that
strapped on the explosives and detonated them. It was THEIR fault ...
blah blah blah ...'

Brainless. They get the facts wrong AND they blame everyone else for
their actions except themselves.

Helpful Hint to fight terrorist idiocy - find a way to get those muslim
nations that deny women the right to an education to GET WITH IT
and not only allow them an education, but allow them to use it!
How can ANY society that denys at least 1/2 the population an
education get survive? Through stupidity I guess ... terrorism.


[edit on 8/1/2005 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Brainless. They get the facts wrong AND they blame everyone else for
their actions except themselves.

Helpful Hint to fight terrorist idiocy - find a way to get those muslim
nations that deny women the right to an education to GET WITH IT
and not only allow them an education, but allow them to use it!
How can ANY society that denys at least 1/2 the population an
education get survive? Through stupidity I guess ... terrorism.

Aside from the Taliban in Afghanistan, which muslim nations are denying women a right to an education?

BTW, I've read that many of the captured fighters in Iraq were well educated and many of the perpetrators of other terrorist acts were also well educated.

gnn.tv...

We examined the educational backgrounds of 75 terrorists behind some of the most significant recent terrorist attacks against Westerners. We found that a majority of them are university-educated, often in technical subjects like engineering.

In the four attacks for which the most complete information about the perpetrators’ educational levels is available – the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the Sept. 11 attacks and the Bali bombings in 2002 – 53 percent of the terrorists had either attended university or had received a university degree. As a point of reference, only 52 percent of Americans have been to university. The terrorists in our study thus appear, on average, to be as well educated as many Americans.

I was hoping you guys wouldn’t miss the point, but you are.

The point is that some INDIVIDUAL terrorists may be intelligent in some ways, maybe even brilliant. But the terrorist movement and the majority of terrorists simply aren’t intelligent enough to see that their methods will never achieve victory, only instant gratification.

And the desire for instant gratification is hardly the trait of a winner…



[edit on 1-8-2005 by skippytjc]

many of the terrorists are well educated, but they are reeducated in extremist owned mosques, which teaches them to hate and to commit martyr for in return they would get virgins. a teacher or a cleric pretty much own ya and can brain wash u. since the teachings mostly about religion.

Originally posted by skippytjc
I was hoping you guys wouldn’t miss the point, but you are.

I guess we're just stupid.

The point is that some INDIVIDUAL terrorists may be intelligent in some ways, maybe even brilliant. But the terrorist movement and the majority of terrorists simply aren’t intelligent enough to see that their methods will never achieve victory, only instant gratification.

While I believe this is true of terrorists, this could be said (and has been) about people in general, not just terrorists.

Stupid People

It is a side effect of what could be referred to in Orwellian-style wording as "groupthink." And it is exactly that. Thought through a group mentality rather than an individual's logical reasoning abilities. Groupthink is not all bad though. It can be used positively to accomplish a goal. However it uses a "sheeple" mentality. The people can only achieve the goal set forth by an individual.

Groupthink , through the sheeple mentality, is easily corrupted. If there is one bad element in the group, it quickly spreads to all. Also, if a group has no goal, the first thought becomes the goal. People who start riots do this. They create a negative goal which the group has no choice but to follow. The goal can only be overcome by the following: completion of the goal, brute force against the group, or appeasement by an individual to the logic and reasoning present in the individuals within the group.

In summation, it is better to work from an individualist idealogy primarily and groupthink as a last option.

Emphasis added.

This is also true of the 'groupthink' toward the goal of wiping out terrorism, as well. The goal of killing all the terrorists is a ... < sorry> stupid idea. My hope is to appease to the logic and reasoning present in the individuals within the group.

[edit on 1-8-2005 by Benevolent Heretic]

But most people aren’t trying to change the political face of the world.

The difference between terrorists and "normal" people who can’t see the big picture is, is that normal people like you and me have no overwhelming desire to change politics. We think we do, but the fact that we aren’t running for office or blowing up people make us not motivated. (Or smart enough to stay away)

And the difference between terrorists and politicians is the ability to rationalize and see the big picture and have the patience to implement the changes that they think will work.

Originally posted by skippytjc
But most people aren’t trying to change the political face of the world.

What? Are you kidding me? BushCo is trying to change the political face of the world. And all the rabid supporters of this war who want to kill all the terrorists are the groupthinkers. That may not be 'most people' but it's just the other side of the terrorist coin.

And the difference between terrorists and politicians is the ability to rationalize and see the big picture and have the patience to implement the changes that they think will work.

skippy, sorry, bud, but if you think that BushCo's strategy or killing all the terrorists (by ridding the world of Islam, no less) are rational and patient thought processes, I have no hope to appease to your logical side.

(I know you didn't mention Islam here, but I've read your other posts and thoughts)

dear Mr Skippy,

I understand why you might think this as i guess that you want to try and find a nice simple reason as to why someone would want to blow themselves up!But it seems to me that you dont really understand, The reasons behind it are complex and to be blunt pretty difficult for any of us who are not muslims to truely understand.

Agreed that some of them may in fact have low IQs but the vast majority of them are well educated. One thing you should never do is undestimate your opponent! that first rule you should learn.

secondly listen to what the Imans and ordinary muslims are saying, for years they been trying to warn us about the buildup of radicals within their communities but we ignored it and basically said it is their problem to sort out. Now all I hear is people saying it's all the muslims fault, they should be sorting it out but what are they to do? they tried to warn us but ours governments ignored it.

You've got to involve these people in the democratic process, involve them in campaigning and the politics of things that afffect them and debate with them to understand why they believe the fundamentalists before you can educate them that they are wrong.

Dont think for a second this doesn't work, it has been done in areas of the UK by the muslims communities and resulted in coverting a lot of very serious radicals.

I'm a strong believer that the key to winning this so called war on terror is not to bomb, maim and kill them, it's to engage them and make them feel that they can contribute positively to society.

You can't fight terror with more terror!

PEACE

Originally posted by arnold_vosloo
I'm a strong believer that the key to winning this so called war on terror is not to bomb, maim and kill them, it's to engage them and make them feel that they can contribute positively to society.

You can't fight terror with more terror!

PEACE

problem is that u cant try to change the most extreme believers who want to change the world in their view, kinda like Osama who wants to see nothing but the Islamic empire. we have to please him, otherwise he feels the peaceful change is a temporary. we can still win others who do not agree with Osama, but are lost in wat to do in a western society that shuns them.

Originally posted by deltaboy
problem is that u cant try to change the most extreme believers who want to change the world in their view, kinda like Osama who wants to see nothing but the Islamic empire. we have to please him, otherwise he feels the peaceful change is a temporary. we can still win others who do not agree with Osama, but are lost in wat to do in a western society that shuns them.

I agree actually, the ones we can do something about are the ones in western countries. There are numerous other problems that have to be addressed not least the corrupt and brutal dictatorships in these mid east islamic states and the whole palastinian/isreal issue being the most complex and difficult. I admit I have a problem with the way we are going about fighting this and I strongly believe that we are all responsible to a degree for these problems by ignoring what our governments were up to allowing, in some cases installing these regimes 20, 30 or more years ago and selling them the weapons to carry out their massacres.

I'm just not convinced that war is the most effective way to do this?

Don't know if I concur with your comment they will never win. Terrorism worked pretty well for the Israeli's against the British in Palestine. Course its a different world now and the current terrorists aren't just taking on the British.

For perhaps the first time ever, I agree completely with skippy.

Now if we could only agree on who deserves the moniker, we'd be all set.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Don't know if I concur with your comment they will never win. Terrorism worked pretty well for the Israeli's against the British in Palestine. Course its a different world now and the current terrorists aren't just taking on the British.

terrorism works well in killling people but never win a war. the Brits decided to leave the place after seeing its global empire falling apart and colonies wanting independence after WW2. the Irgun which was mostly responsible for the terrorist attacks on British and Arabs mostly dissolved to become the Israeli Defense Force.

name me one terrorist group right now that has achieved wat they wanted. the IRA? ETA? Al Qaeda? etc.

Originally posted by skippytjc
Terrorism, a tool of the stupid and unmotivated.

You Are Correct, Skippytjc!

Who Are the Global Terrorists?

"The terrorists -- and the other states that aid and abet them -- serve as grim reminders that democracy is fragile and needs to be guarded with vigilance," Shultz warned. We must "cut [the Nicaraguan cancer] out," and not by gentle means: "Negotiations are a euphemism for capitulation if the shadow of power is not cast across the bargaining table," Shultz declared, condemning those who advocate "utopian, legalistic means like outside mediation, the United Nations, and the World Court, while ignoring the power element of the equation." The US was exercising "the power element of the equation" with mercenary forces based in Honduras, under Negroponte's supervision, and successfully blocking the "utopian, legalistic means" pursued by the World Court and the Latin American Contadora nations -- as Washington continued to do until its terrorist wars were won.

Distorted Morality: America's War on Terrorism

Well, just to illustrate, let's pick the peak year, the worst year, 1985 in the Middle East, top story of the year. So who wins the prize for the worst acts of terrorism in the Middle East in 1985? Well, I know of three candidates, maybe you can suggest a different one. One candidate is a car bombing in Beirut in 1985, The car was placed outside a mosque. The bomb was timed to go off when people were leaving to make sure it killed the maximum number of people. It killed, according to the Washington Post, 80 people. It wounded over 250, mostly women and girls leaving the mosque. There was a huge explosion so it blew up the whole street, killing babies in beds and so on and so forth. The bomb was aimed at a Muslim sheik who escaped. It was set off by the CIA in collaboration with British intelligence and Saudi intelligence and specifically authorized by William Casey, according to Bob Woodward's history of Casey and the CIA. So that is a clear-cut example of international terrorism. Very unambiguous and I think it is one of the candidates for the prize for the peak year of 1985.

Professor Chomsky Defines Terrorism not as the Weapon of the Weak - but Exactly the Opposite.

Distorted Morality: America's War on Terrorism

In any event, international terrorism in the Middle East certainly continues and has a long history and if you look over the record, of course, it is mixed and complicated but I think you will find that the balance is pretty much along the lines that I described, in fact, the balance reflects the means of violence available, as it usually does. If you look around at terror, in fact, that's why, in the whole range of terror, state terror is far worse than individual terror for the obvious reason that states have means of violence that individuals don't have, or groups. And that's what you find if you look, I think, overwhelmingly. It is commonly said that terrorism is a weapon of the weak. That's completely false, at least if you accept the official U.S. definition of terror. If you do that, then terror is overwhelming the weapon of the strong, like most other weapons.

[edit on 1/8/05 by Souljah]

Dedicated to Souljah (well deserved to):




I bestow you Souljah, with the first (of many I am sure) Broken Record awards. You have earned this hands down, there was no contest. Grats!

Originally posted by skippytjc
Dedicated to Souljah (well deserved to):




I bestow you Souljah, with the first (of many I am sure) Broken Record awards. You have earned this hands down, there was no contest. Grats!

Well skippy, I guess you are just handing it down, you've earned that one more than once.

Well I guess I have to REPEAT these FACT in Order for SOME People to Start Thinking with their Own Heads and Seeing whats Going on in the World Today.

So I guess you couldnt find ANY Reasonable Argument Against my post, so Ofcourse I get back the Usual - Insults.

How Childish.