Why Terrorism works, and how the US has used it too, page 1


Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 24-7-2004 @ 11:17 PM by taibunsuu
Terrorism is the use of violence on a population to sway a government or its people. The terrorist act is a propaganda piece that can be used by both the aggressor and the victim. It is a tactic of war, and as such has been employed by the United States of America, in defiance of the Geneva Convention.

Usually in a war, the clear victor will take the moral high road and not perform terror, because it clearly posesses the means to win the war on conventional terms. The underdog in a conflict, or when the conflict is difficult, both parties, use terrorism.

Here is the USA's biggest terrorist act:

On the night of March 9 - 10th, the 1945 the US bombed Tokyo with incendiary bombs. This created a firestorm that killed 100,000 people. It essentially destroyed the city. This was accomplished with 334 B-29 bombers. This was done at a tiny margin of the cost of the Manhatten Project.

Then on August 6th and 8th of that year, the US dropped atomic bombs on two Japanese citizens.

This constitutes several major laws in the Geneva Convention, including deliberate targeting of civilians, deliberate destruction of a city, and use of poison gas - in the form of radiactive fallout.

None of these strikes affected the military of Japan. They were performed to kill civilians for political ends. They succeeded. While the firebombing of Tokyo did little to shake Japanese resolve, the idea of 80,000 people being destroyed be a single bomb was more potent. The spectre of radiation was also terrifying. Japan surrendered completely while it still had military power. It's national will was destroyed through displays of terrifying power.

pegasus.phys.saga-u.ac.jp...

The terrorist attacks on the United States give Americans insight to the effects of the atomic bombing. The images of the Pennsylvania crash and the Pentagon crash were nearly repressed under the fantastic and horrifying spectacle of the World Trade Center exploding:



And the horror movie-like collapse:



The reason that both Hiroshima and 9/11 were effective terror tools was because of their simplistic horror. Stalin once said, "One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic." This is due to the human mind's inability to imagine millions of deaths, but it's emotional ability to be appreciate one.

41,000 people killed in car crashes in 2001 in the United States, 15,000 murdered, and 160,000 dead from cancer, with 20,000 dead from the flu. Like the 100,000 killed by many little bombs in Tokyo, those numbers are no cause for alarm because they are too abstract. But, the singular image of one bomb wiping out tens of thousands, the pure potency of a plane exploding through a skyscraper, are enough to severely impact a population.


reply posted on 25-7-2004 @ 08:56 AM by Archangel76
FredT,

The US is not a terrorist, but if "terror"ism is defined as the use of fear as a political weapon, the US has indeed used it, even in Iraq, and we would, frankly, be stuipid not to use it. For example, there was an incident where the military deployed a Massive Air Burst Ordnance (MOAB)- basically the most powerful conventional weapon - outside an iraqi town (I think Nasariya or something). This bomb didn't hurt anyone, as it went off in the desert, but if you saw it go off right outside your town, imagine how afraid you'd be. Would you really want to take on the people with that ability? Many wouldn't, and one of the keys to winning a war the American way is to stop a large part of the enemy from fighting in the first place. The tactic is to bring such terror into their hearts that they see how futile it is to fight. That's why they called it 'Shock and Awe'.

The thing that modern terrorists, such as AlQaeda forget, is that nowadays, it is not necessary to kill thousands of people. That will only galvanize support against you. What you do is, you strike fear in people, fear of what you could do.

I agree with your leanings, Fred. If we did to our enemies what they would more than happily do to us if THEY had our military, we would have literally reduced Kabul, Baghdad, Damascus, and wherever to a radiactive parking lot. That is the kind of obscene thing that 'people' like AlQaeda would do without a second thought if they had the ability.


reply posted on 25-7-2004 @ 09:55 PM by jd27
I have a great idea! Lets do away with the word terrorist, by doing this we can stop those who pull one tube too many of some good hydro weed, to suddenly have the revelatation "the terrorists use bombs.....and the USA uses bombs...so....whoa, man that makes the USA terrorists too, far out man!" Anybody who uses the threat of any kind of violence to achieve a goal, is using terrorism, so pull another tube, and realize that when your parents threatened to spank you if you misbehaved, then your parents are "terrorists". Lets just call our current enemy militant islamic fundamentalists, M.I.F.s for short. M.I.F.s specifically target innocent civilians to gain there objective of a dominant muslim culture, comparable to if the USA specifically targeted apartments and homes of citizens in an enemy state with precision guided missiles and threatened to continually do so until the government surrendered. We do not and have never done that. So if we use the term M.I.F., nobody can trip out and say the USA is a M.I.F. too. But every country who has fought a war can be called a "terrorist", thats what war is, you must be the most terrifying to win, as Kurtz said in apocalypse now, to win you have to make a friend of horror. Too bad we are too civilized to make a video of us brutally murdering a M.I.F., maybe cutting his organs out one by one while he screams in agony as we pull out his intestines hand over hand and fill the hole with pig intestines, then send it to Al Jazeera, but no we wont do that, even if its the only language the M.I.Fs understand. We wont do that because we are not "terrorists" the same way they are.

[edit on 25-7-2004 by jd27]


reply posted on 26-7-2004 @ 10:04 AM by Archangel76
Some points about the Evil Empire:

This 'evil empire':
-Risked the lives of it's citizens to intervene to stop the famine in Somailia in 1993. Somalia contained precisely zero interest for the US.

-Ditto the Balkans. This time the problem was ethnic cleansing. Again, no vital national interests at stake.

-Is providing the bulk of the money used to treat HIV victims in Africa.

-Provides the bulk of ALL foreign aid.

These are just a few of the things America, teh 'evil empire' has done. Is the US always right? of course not, but when it is wrong, it takes a long hard look at itself and it's mistakes. Here's what a real 'evil empire' would do, if equiped with US military might:

-We would have wiped out way more than the thousands of intented civilian targets. Any self-respecting 'evil empire' would have flattened the country literally. And as for providing funds/infrastructure/troops to help rebuild countries we go to war with? Sheesh! Some evil empire we are! Well, Americans really must be dumb if we can't even get acting evil right!

-We WOULD NOT stand protests held against us by people in Iraq. Would an evil empire sit around and allow these protests continue? Would it accept that these people are obviously pissed off and have every right to be? Well, I don't know, the whole evil thing seems to suggest something more along the lines of: shoot 'em up (Hey, the Chinese government did it and retains the ability to do so).

-We would do exactly what 'jd27' said: 'make a video of us brutally murdering a Militant.Islamic.Fundementalist., maybe cutting his organs out one by one while he screams in agony as we pull out his intestines hand over hand and fill the hole with pig intestines, then send it to Al Jazeera, but no we wont do that, even if its the only language the M.I.Fs understand.' I mean, that is a really evil way to deal with it. But I guess the US is the dumbest evil empire of all time then, if we can't grasp these facts.

Do I think the USA never goes wrong? Of course not. Some of my personal gripes against my country's actions include the horrific planning (or lack thereof) of postwar iraq, the sacrifice of principles in order to benefit from trade with China, the unwillingness to use our considerable influence to bring Israel to heel.

I mention all this to show that Patriotic Americans who happen to agree to some things that for instance Michael Moore would not, do not simply believe the US is infallible. There are tons of things the US has done wrong. But evil empire? Only if you seriously redefine evil.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^