whether we are talking IRA, Alquaeda, or any other?? b) and to what degree does our current presidential administration help achieve the goal of the terrorists they claim to be fighting??
Careful, this is a bit of a trick question, and you may find yourself contradicting yourself from part a to part b.
2007-07-26 16:39:35 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Phrased that generally, it is to use fear (terror) as a tool to affect political and/or social change.
The specific change they seek depends on the group.
And fear-mongering by any govt directly plays into the goals of the terrorists. Because the population is often willing to damage or destroy their own society to achieve "security". But that damage and disruption is exactly what the terrorists want to achieve.
2007-07-26 16:44:33 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
A. They attempt to gain what they want, whether it be control or change in the world, by spreading fear throughout their oppositions population. In general, they want to be feared, and have some way of backing up that fear.
B. The current administration actually aids the terrorists by making us a fear them more, as though this actually achieves the terrorists goal, they take advantage of our fear to bolster their own power.
In a way, fear can increase the power of both the terrorist and the target... or at least the targets leaders....
By the way, this question made me realize an important link between two things I had so far considered separately. Thanks a ton.
2007-07-26 23:57:24 · answer #2 · answered by Wise_Guy_57 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The goal of terrorist organizations is to promote fear in order to bring about a desired change. Different terrorist groups have different motivations, but the ultimate goal is the same. By fighting terrorists in the way we have chosen to do so we do in effect support their cause by giving them a bogeyman and adding credibility to their claims among their followers that we are invaders and occupiers. Therefore in their viewpoint we are dangerous to their chosen way of life. This action makes it easier for them to spread hate and encourage the recruitment of new followers.
Now having said that I must also add this. While our actions may indeed encourage terrorists in some way they are still necessary. Terrorists cannot be allowed to act with impunity. Such a move would only embolden them to attempt larger and greater acts of terror. We need a balance, but unfortunately no such balance exists. We either attack them where they live or wait like cattle being grazed for slaughter.
coragryph: Good answer. It only works if people allow themselves to be frightened into giving up their freedoms in the name of security. I don't think we are completely to that point in the United States, but the danger definitely exists.
2007-07-26 23:52:15 · answer #3 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
To instill fear into their enemy.... and b)? When the threat is real?!? I hate to tell you this, but contrary to what your little friends Obama and Clinton tell you yes, there are people out there who would love to just kill you in your sleep. Hate to be blunt on the issue. Now does Bush have to start each speech off with "Terrorists around the globe"? We could do without that, yes. But does that mean that the mean old buggie man in the closet (bin Laden, yea he eats little kids) will go away? No.
Heres a question, you're in an alley, and a guy jumps out with a knife wanting your wallet. You have (concealed) a knife or even a gun. Are you going to a) give him your wallet b) ignore him and walk away, hoping he'll leave you alone or c) talk the talk and, if need be, walk the walk? I don't know about you but I'd throw down in that situation.
I don't know if you've seen what they do to those unfortunate to die by them, but its not pretty. They don't always invite them over for little tea parties. So to an extent, yes its justified that Bush reminds us that there is a war on.
2007-07-27 00:03:18 · answer #4 · answered by m 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Interesting question!
Well, they vie for the attention of the world. And our current response to the terrorist threat helps them gain notoriety.
This brings to mind the bombing in Oklahoma City. It happened, the immediately responsible parties were dealt with, but the state of Michigan wasn't invaded and ransacked to find each and every member of the Michigan Militia.
2007-07-26 23:47:28 · answer #5 · answered by Julia M-M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
To act toward any one group or country the way that the United states acts toward the entire Middle East
2007-07-26 23:53:16 · answer #6 · answered by ... 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It varies upon the various terrorists groups. The KKKs goal was to intimidate a group of US citizens.
Israeli terrorists goal was to drive Great Britain out of the Palestinian territories to take the land over.
Bin Laden's goal was to end US influence over Saudi Arabia and remove US bases from their country against the will of the Royal Family.
The IRA's goal was to remove UK/Catholic rule over their country.
The French Resistance goal was to drive Nazi Germany out of France.
2007-07-26 23:44:16 · answer #7 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Creation of fear in a target audience. It gives them power over the audience.
2007-07-26 23:48:27 · answer #8 · answered by cornbread 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Fear, it is about fear to get something done. One of the cores of conservatism is to stand by the father figure that knows best regardless and attack anyone who presents evidence of guilt before they can weaken the strong father figure image in times of fear.
2007-07-26 23:46:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
To instill fear in the populace to gain ideological or political victory.
2007-07-26 23:46:14 · answer #10 · answered by hedddon 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋