Are nowdays "terrorists" actually terrorists?

[Macoleco]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

[onlinebiker]

It should also be noted thaton a ship the head is where you take a dump.



That' s gotta figure into the equation.

[no one]

If the president gets offed by some terrorist, that individual may just receive a cigar, and the key to the city. 

[Brian37]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

There are very few axioms I agree with. One of them is, "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist".

That part is true. But it is still bullshit knowing all 7 billion humans live on the same planet, and all compete for resources. 

So the real argument for humanity is greed is what divides our species and far to often than not, those who deserve power lose to those who lust for power.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

Terrorists don't want to create chaos, at least not as anything more than a means to an end.  The slaughter of civilians is done to create fear and to pressure heads of state into giving terrorists what they want.

Boru

[Yonadav]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

Strikes on the civilian population are strikes on the soft underbelly of a society. It's just about defenseless, and that's the message. I did this to you today. I can do this to you tomorrow. I can do this to you over and over, and there's not much you can do about it. You have to negotiate with me, or I'm not going to stop. Assassinating a president or a general is a nice trophy, but its not really kicking a society where it hurts.

[Rev. Rye]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

The thing is, a lot of the time, terrorist groups don't really have much of a master plan. I think I remember reading that al-Qaeda apparently worked under the assumption that if they just kept doing attacks like they did, the governments of the world would eventually just let them do what they want, even letting them set up a new Caliphate. I can't find exactly where I read that now, but it seems that that's kind of par for the course when dealing with terrorist groups. Guys like Max Abrahams have looked at the psychology of terrorists and noticed that the ideologies are far less coherent than one would expect a group that really wants change and will stop at nothing to get it to be. Sometimes, leaders of terrorist groups can't even explain what it is they even want. And if they do get what they want somehow, they're very likely to change what it is they want anyway.

Have you ever seen Four Lions? Because that's kind of the way I understand how terrorist groups actually work.



Apparently, Chris Morris based this on actual research he made on terrorism after 9/11 and the whole "Muslims bombing a mosque to radicalise the moderates" plan that Barry cooks up is based on MI5 surveillance transcripts verbatim.


And besides, if you want to actually do something to legitimately create chaos on a mass scale like you suggest, I'd argue you're no longer in the category of terrorist, but revolutionary.

[Yonadav]

For a long time, the head has represented control, main part of something, etc., and that without it, the rest cannot function.

So, this idea made me wonder, if terrorists want to create actual chaos, why do they limit themselves to the murdering of simple civilians? Why not go for the "head", meaning people with political power such as presidents, ministers, etc? By cutting the head off, you will actually create chaos in a country.

Kill a homeless, nobody cares. Kill the president, the country trembles. 

Could it be then that terrorism is a business, and it lacks a real purpose?

The thing is, a lot of the time, terrorist groups don't really have much of a master plan. I think I remember reading that al-Qaeda apparently worked under the assumption that if they just kept doing attacks like they did, the governments of the world would eventually just let them do what they want, even letting them set up a new Caliphate. I can't find exactly where I read that now, but it seems that that's kind of par for the course when dealing with terrorist groups. Guys like Max Abrahams have looked at the psychology of terrorists and noticed that the ideologies are far less coherent than one would expect a group that really wants change and will stop at nothing to get it to be. Sometimes, leaders of terrorist groups can't even explain what it is they even want. And if they do get what they want somehow, they're very likely to change what it is they want anyway.

Have you ever seen Four Lions? Because that's kind of the way I understand how terrorist groups actually work.



Apparently, Chris Morris based this on actual research he made on terrorism after 9/11 and the whole "Muslims bombing a mosque to radicalise the moderates" plan that Barry cooks up is based on MI5 surveillance transcripts verbatim.


And besides, if you want to actually do something to legitimately create chaos on a mass scale like you suggest, I'd argue you're no longer in the category of terrorist, but revolutionary.

I don't know. Terrorism has changed a lot because the way terrorist organizations have had to change the way that they are organized. Take more traditional terrorist groups such as Irish Home Rule, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, or FALN in Peurto Rico. They had a fairly recognizable organizational structure and fairly specific agenda. As we got a lot better at infiltrating terrorist organizations, organizational structure broke down, and cells started to operate a lot more independently. Any terrorist organization would prefer to have more structure and the ability to plan and coordinate between cells. But that just isn't possible anymore. We've really mastered getting in there and working the cells for intel. So things are much more self directed by individual cells. At the time of 9/11, it was fairly clear what al queda wanted-- a withdrawal of US forces from Saudi Arabia, as their number one objective. They have a general theory that we can't maintain our military spending forever, and that eventually something will have to break.