I get the idea that because of 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, the numerous attacks in Israel and around the world that a lot of people seem think that Muslim extremists are a different bred of terrorist. I don’t really see that.
Yes they are using suicide bombing a lot but the means of delivery is really the only difference IMO.
The IRA carried out many horrible acts in their time and while they never used suicide bombers they did come up with some horrible ways of delivery. The worst of these were ‘proxy bombers’. They would hold a family at gunpoint and get a family member(cop, soldier, workman etc) to drive a car into a target and then detonate the car bomb.
They would plant secondary devices timed to go off when the emergency services were at the scene of the original bombing.
They controled their own areas with vicious vigilantism. Kneecapping and executing people who they saw as unwanted or dangerous to their efforts.
They also used long delay switches to increase their window of delivery. This tactic was most famously used when they nearly took out the whole of Thatcher’s government during a party conference. The same bomber who was arrested for other offences was working on a plan to plant 20 odd bombs months in advance in hotels in the main holiday areas around Britain. The plan was that one bomb would go off once a week for twenty weeks bringing the British tourist industry to it’s knees and killing untold amounts of civilians. Luckily as I said the bomber was arrested and the plan never happened but the bomber who is released now has talked about the plan on TV documentaries about the incident. He regrets the things he did on a personnel level but says he was at war and would do it all again under the same circumstances.
There are many many other incidents that show that western Christians are as capable as any other to commit unbelievable acts of barbarity. Humans can do almost anything to their fellow humans given the right conditions.
I don’t see Muslim terrorists as any worse than other people who have brought themselves to that level of heinousness and barbarity. They are no worse they are just using different tactics.
I don’t see how they’re intrinsically different from any other terrorist either. (And non-Muslim terrorist organizations, such as the Tamil Tigers, have also used suicide bombings.)
But I think that when people call radical Islamist terrorists “worse” than other kinds of terrorists, they basically mean that there are more of them. The problem they pose is worse.
Further to what **Kimstu **said about the scope of the problem, I think you’re underestimating the problem that suicide bombing presents. How do you deter attacks from people who don’t care if they die? Or, even worse, people who want to die. We’re so used to thinking that a desire for self preservation is something we can count on. As for Tamil Tigers using suicide bombs, who says they are a different “breed” of terrorist? Still, their targets were at least local, weren’t they? Islamic terrorism is world-wide in scope. No county is immune-- not even Muslim countries or Muslim civilians. There seems to be no limit to whom they will kill, anywhere.
I doubt that anyone would dispute that any group of people are capable of acting like Islamic terrorists. What sets Islamic terrorists apart is the sheer volume of their attacks.
I think the other problem is that most other terrorist group had clearly defined goals. Presumably the IRA would have stopped their campaign if the British pulled out of Northern Ireland. The Muslim terrorists don’t seem to have any such demands or goals. One wonders whether they will ever allow the possibility of dialogue.
They have stated goals… but much like the UK was unwilling to let a band of thugs (no matter how well meaning) dictate their boarders… the west at large, is unwilling to allow a bunch of thugs dictate their actions…
I agree with Kimstu. Terrorism is terrorism. And more to the point, it’s well to remember that modern mechanized armies always kill more people than terrorists do. Look at the civilian death toll from the Israeli army versus that of Palestinian terrorists, or that of the Russian army versus Chechen terrorists, or even that of the U.S. military versus Al Qaeda. Terrorism can rarely aspire to the reach or killing power of a modern army.
Indeed and that is generally the reason for it. You can’t fight in a ‘convention’* way so you resort to terrorism.
*It has never stopped some dominant powers carrying out acts that fit into the definition of terrorism either.
Well. There’s also the aspect of ever being able to reach a peaceful solution. With secular terror organisations, like IRA and ETA, supposedly there is room for talk, give and take and compromise - however, if you’re operating from a religious conviction that describes what you do as the absolute good and the enemy as absolute evil, then there’s no room for negotiations since you can’t negotiate with the dictates of God, indeed it might be a sin to even try to think about it. So basically with Islamic terrorists, it’s a kill or be killed struggle. Also there’s the thing how far you’re willing to take things. Whereas an IRA terrorist might have moral scruples from his religion or from other sources, with religious sanction there is no end to the things you could do and still be moral superior within your own understanding.
If you accept that it’s all about religion. I don’t think so though. The PLO and other Palestinian groups while wrapping themselves up in religious dogma are a nationalist movement at the heart of the matter IMO.
Yes there are 100% religious warriors and there is only one way to stop them and that is with a bullet or a bomb but without the mainstream public support the fight ends. I think once the perceived or real injustices are addressed the majority would turn their back on violence. Decades of hatred and religious indoctrination makes this much harder I’ll grant you.
As I showed in my OP the IRA weren’t held back by many moral scruples. They were vicious bastards when they wanted to be. Although you do have a point as there is a lot of religious moral superiority backing up a lot of Islamic terrorism. There was however a lot of non-religious political moral superiority at the heart of the IRA and ETA.