IObviously there are various terrorist groups that have figured out ways to terrorize others with varying levels of effectivensss.
But, I never hear about, say, the U.S. deciding that we will now terrorize the terrorists. Is this even possible, and if it is, what could be some basic strategies that could be used to turn the tables on terrorist groups?
Are they even “terrorizable”?
That is the whole point of counter-terrorism.
The British Army did this against the Irish Republican Army and like-minded groups. It colluded with loyalist ( = pro-British) terrorists, ostensibly against IRA terrorists, but in reality often resulting in the death of innocent Catholics not personally involved in the conflict.
End result - massive recruitment for the IRA and fatal blow to Britain’s credibility in the region.
Not a recommended strategy IMHO.
As a general rule, such responses have been very counter productive. All you have to do is look at how the standard Isaeli responses to terrorist attacks have greatly increased the fervor of the Palestinians against them. Bombing “leadership targets” that end up killing far more civilians, destroying the houses of families of alledged terrorists, the recent sweep on the southern border of Gaza that killed over 50 civilians. Every single one of these breeds more bitterness.
BTW: “Counter-terrorism” as used by analysts have nothing in common with such tactics.
I think this is just rhetoric. I don’t really think the US is going to adopt terror tactics (intentionally).
One of the major goals or terrorism is to provoke a response and escalate any conflict. This is why the invasion of Iraq and Abu-Ghraib are such disasters for the war on terrorism, sadly they are perfect recruitment propaganda for Al-Quida.
The general definition of terrorism is that it (1) targets civilians, and/or (2) intends to coerce societies or governments (examples cites here and here).
I assume we can all agree that terrorists are not civilians. And that terrorists are not ‘societies’ in any meaningful way, nor are they in control of any governments (the Taleban were an exception which proved the rule). Ipso facto, it’s not possible to terrorise terrorists.
Moved to IMHO.
-xash
General Questions Moderator
Seems to me that to effectively terrorize the terrorists, you gotta BECOME a terrorist. Not that we’re far from that, already.
The first thing you do is look to hit them where it hurts. Make them consider what they have to lose. Part of the problem here is that most of these terrorist guys don’t HAVE much to lose, which is why they became terrorists in the first place.
The only things I can think of are things that we wouldn’t wanna do in the first place. If we catch 'em, force-feed 'em pork or pig’s blood, then kill 'em. If we don’t catch 'em, soak the corpse in pig’s blood before committing the customary corpse atrocities that seem to be all the rage these days. Oh, yeah, and if we can determine the corpse’s identity, go kill all his relatives and friends and burn everything he ever touched.
Any regime that would do all this might well triumph over terrorism… but I don’t wanna think about what kind of regime it would be. The last time anything like THIS worked was for the Mongol Horde…
Decimation might work. It worked wonders for the moral of Roman soldiers. Hitler had a similar approach in occupied territories. Not that I’m advocating violence, Hitler, or Roman soldiers. 
Worked for the Romans only because they had the troop strength, occupation plans, and the will to back it up.
Didn’t work for Hitler at all.
You can’t terrorize the terrorists. If the United States or any other target country had enough information about the current identities and locations of any terrorists, they would either arrest or kill them. What I assume people are really suggesting when they propose this idea is to imitate the terrorists; if they kill our innocent civilians, we should respond by killing their innocent civilians.
Leaving aside the moral issues, it’s an ineffective tactic. Most terrorists are already unconcerned about the suffering of others; so they wouldn’t be deterred by the deaths of innocent civilians. And the civilian population which was targeted for retatiatory attacks would probably become a recruiting ground for additional terrorists.