Excluding the answers, The United States of America and all sentences after loyal's first one and Think Richly saying that religion had nothing to do with terrorism, all the answers are right. There are over 100 valid definitions of terrorism based on a study done by the US in 1988. The roots of terrorism range from idealogical reasons to religious reasons to political reasons, etc., etc., etc. Root causes run a long gamit.
2007-12-13 11:18:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well Jessica the beautiful,as usual,you ask a good question! I've read all the answers,and they are all damn good ones too! Now let me weigh in on something that so far everybody has missed. America has a military, that has a budget about as large as some terrorist nations whole GNP, am I correct? This "Terrorist Problem ",has only really kicked into high gear since the Berlin wall fell down right?So Russia was out of the picture. You have to have a "Bad Guy",to warrent such an expenditure of Tax dollars! When the "Shrub" said that we were going to fight a war on terrorism until there were no more terrorists,what he was really saying was America will be in a war with no end! There is a book called "The rise and fall of the 3rd Reich, by William Shirer,where Hitler said the very same thing over 60 years ago! What I am trying to say is The NEOCON'S ARE the TERRORIST! If we didn't have a terrorist problem before we invaded Iraq,we got them now! What would we Americans do if Saddam had invaded us because we had weapons of Mass destruction! And guess what, we got 'em! Nobody likes an invader,we don't and they don't! The "Shrub" has made us look like the Bad guys in this stupid war,that's why we need to get out!NOW! But,I've gotten off the topic again,...er..wha...Well,that's just me ranting again....
2007-12-13 11:55:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by studdmuffynn 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Terrorism is nothing more than a form of guerrilla warfare that is vilified to turn the majority against the actions of the minority that is carrying out the terroristic actions. In other words, terrorism is just unconventional warfare. It's called terrorism to make the people committing the act look bad. What's the primary cause of warfare/what are people fighting over? Resources, or in other words, money, just like in any conflict. For example, when the Contras in Central America were fighting against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua in the '80's, they were called "Freedom Fighters" by the US and were given aid by the US government. The Contras did fight the Sandinistas (at times), but also carried out attacks against civilians, which included rape, torture, arson, and kidnapping. As a result, they were labeled "terrorists" by many other countries. Like the saying goes, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
2016-04-09 00:31:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are over 100 definitions of terrorism. The root causes may be many. One that I believe is very relevant is the over-population of this small planet, which has finite natural resources, and cannot much longer sustain the procreation and proliferation of the human species. What I call, "Too many rats in the cage theory", leads to violence (call it terrorism, war, rioting,etc) all in competition for food, space, natural resources, which are not available because or real shortages, corrupt governments, adverse weather, and the people adversely affected by these conditions, resort to uncivilized methods such as terroristic acts. What you deem a terrorist, I may call a freedom fighter. A case in point was the Waco Massacre where over 86 innocent children, women, and men were needlessly killed by an assaut of over two hundred federal agents, military, and other law enforcement officials. The majority of U.S. residents will believe (based on their news media,politically correct information) that Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist solely responsible for this act. I strongly disagree, because the Waco massacre would never have happened if it were not for the U.S. government's unprovoked and illegal attacks at Ruby Ridge which resulted in the FBI sniper killing a mother and her baby, and government agents killed Weaver's son and the family dog. Mc Veigh saw these two atrocities, took action, and retaliated by participating in the Oklahoma City bombing. Whether McVeigh is a terrorist or a freedom fighter, is debatable, depending on how much information you have, and whether you are liberal or conservative. The Muslim / Islamic terrorists are the greatest danger to world peace today, and their objective is to destroy Western civilization.
2007-12-13 11:42:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by john c 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
24 answers, and I only see two correct ones. Terrorism has nothing to do with religion or poverty. It is a tactic used in conflicts to get what you want done by using brutal and demoralizing means. Its root causes are usually a population that is oppressed and is not willing to be oppressed anymore. The weaker they are, the more likely they will use terrorism, as this tactic can be effective regardless of the difference in power between the group and the entity they are attacking.
2007-12-13 08:37:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
I agree with the clash of cultures idea somewhat. As one segment of the world's population advances the less developed segments feel the encroachment of the advanced culture.
Culture is not just a way a civilization conducts itself, it becomes a part of an individual's sense of self. When it is threatened by new ideas or foreign ideas, there is a sense of personal attack. The less developed culture has fewer resources to fight back and so resorts to terrorism. Terrorism has never been a successful tactic. It is well that it isn't successful, humanity would never advance if it were.
2007-12-13 14:19:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Terrorism has been around as long as political systems have existed
in the the late 1800's international Anarchists were the Al-Quida of the day and went so far as using suicide bombers to kill Czar Alexander of Russia
they had hoped by killing him a spontaneous revolution would rise up and bring freedom to Russia. unfortunately they ended up killing the first czar in centuries that was actaully granting freedoms and rights to his people and was actaully on his way to meet with his government to propose a constiutional monarchy system similar to England's
instead they got his angry and not very competant son who immediately took away many of the freedoms that his father had instated and locked up or banished thousands of people
in 1914 another group of freedom fighters (terrorists to the powers that be) assasinated the Arch Duke of Austria Hungary in an attemp to free Serbia from the domination of Austria-Hungary leading to the start of World War One
Al-Quida and all the groups blamed to be them (most are not) is just the latest flavor of the month
Kill thier leader and the group will likely wither and die off on its own
2007-12-13 02:05:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
People upset ith what is going on and not agreeing with the government. look at Ireland. You have some that are far off in either direction. Germany, Japan both hand them. They want to promote an agenda and most think it is so far flung it is not taken seriously as in most cases it should not be considered. If you don't watch out and stamp it out then it becomes a "cause" and ends up a "movement" and movements of that kind normally end up with millions being murder it the group is able to take power. So they are upset that they are considered "nuts" by the majority of people and their own class of people think they are radical. take care.
2007-12-13 02:49:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by R J 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
An unproductive culture that lacks opportunity and reason, in which the individual is isolated, without hope for a better future, and is easy prey for warlords and opportunists.
Thomas P.M. Barnett addresses the situation quite well in "The Pentagon's New Map.
2007-12-13 13:18:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Boomer Wisdom 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
When a powerful entity imposes onto a weak entity for political and financial gains, you get victory for the super power. This "victory" lasts until the grievances of the oppressed become so unbearable that they, in order to level the playing field, unfortunately turn to terror to be able to deal with their huge power discrepancy.
It then becomes a vicious cycle and only the innocent lose on both sides.
In short, terrorism is a result of injustice. If you corner a kitten, she will crouch and shrink into a corner, but she will eventually claw at its aggressor.
Terrorism is a reaction and the only cure for terror is justice.
And to those who think terror is a result of other's jealousy or "hating our freedoms", I say PLEASE you owe it to yourself to read more and find out why. Until we know the real reasons we won't be able to find a solution. Knowledge is essential and the truth mandatory in dealing with such a terrible tragedy as terrorism.
2007-12-13 01:40:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by TJTB 7
·
5⤊
3⤋