Discussion in 'Terrorism' started by Derideo_Te, May 30, 2017.
State 'failure' also plays a key issue the recruitment. The inability or unwillingness of a nation state to provide basic services and infrastructure for it's people (or a particularity large persecuted minority) will always lead to the alienation of those at the bottom of the pile. Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Nigeria and just about any other nation you can think of that is currently afflicted with chronic, large scale domestic terrorism issues are also riddled with corruption, maladministration and huge wealth dispensaries in wealth between ruling 'elites' and a large, often rural underclass.
So yes economic development is definitely the key to fatally undermining support for terrorist groups in the long term in any particular country via things like micro finance schemes and local village infrastructure projects etc. But it also requires intense international political pressure on the governments concerned to force change on issues like transparency, corruption and maladministration. And to date this is not something Western Nations have been willing to do on a consistent basis partly because they are dependent on local co-operation in the 'War on Terror' and partly because of a whole host of other historical, financial and diplomatic issues.
It's not all gloom and doom of course - global living standards are rising and hundreds of millions of people are being lifted out of poverty. This will have an impact but it will be generational. South America is a good example of how over time the political environment re: support for terrorist/'revolutionary' movements can change.
There is no way to defeat terrorism without defeating the terrorist ideology. It matters not how rich or poor someone is - they can be brainwashed by ideology. You can starve them - beat them - kill their neighbors and children. In many cases this only fuels the ideology.
Many resources are being put towards things that won't work. Almost nothing is being done with respect to the evil ideology and what is being done is being done by a few people who are not given media coverage. The Gov't and media shuns any attempt to address the evil ideology that fuels these groups.
You can go after this ideology by teaching a few ideas. The same ideas on which western democracy was founded - the ideas of the enlightenment thinkers.
It all boils down to respect for individual liberty and following the golden rule. The Islamist hates individual liberty. They believe they are justified in forcing their religious beliefs on others through physical violence (Law - Sharia Law). The Islamist hates secularism - the idea that Church and State should be separate - that law should not be made on the basis of religious belief. They believe the authority of Gov't comes from God and not the governed.
These are the principles on which western democracy was founded. These are the principles given in the Declaration of Independence.
The Establishment in this nation and others hate these principles as it interferes with the ability to control the masses and maintain power. 12 years of school and somehow we manage not to teach kids these principles. The MSM refuses to educate people on these principles and why the ideology of the extremists is an anathema to this ideology. SCOTUS has rejected these principles and our justice system.
This is not some accident.
RE: These Military Vets Have Found A Smarter Way To Fight The War On Terror
⁜→ Giftedone, et al,
There is no question about it, beating the "Ideology" is one of several key factors in combating Jihadist, Fedayeen Activist, Hostile Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Followers, and other Asymmetric Fighters. But there are times when this is not as key as other principle factors. Being concerned about ideology is only one ray of an enlightened view. That is because not all Asymmetric opponents take-up arms as a matter of ideology (but that is another topic for another time). Or, that is because the opposition in place has passed-on the hatred (or other motivators) for several generations, and not only do up need to defeat the father, but also the son (and maybe even the next generational son!)...
◈ RULE #1: No one shoe (in this case → a counterterrorism or counterinsurgency approach) fits all scenarios.
◈ RULE #2: Find out what the essential motivating factors drive the guerrilla warrior set (there may be more than one set in play).
◈ RULE #3: The defeat of an Asymmetric character is dependent on breaking the will to continue the fight. (And that is tailored to each opponent. Some fight for revenge, some fight for wealth and power, and still others fight on principle and ideology.)
◈ RULE #4: The campaign must take into consideration all the players and characters with the objective → Break (all) your opponents will to fight...
◈ RULE #5: Break their will, and kick them when they're down.
Just a thought,
This applies to the war option - going after those who have been radicalized and who are active. The above however does nothing to kill the ideology that plants new seedlings on a daily basis - as such - no matter how many you kill - the zombie apocalypse continues.
In the words of the Peter Gabriel song "BIKO" about Steven Biko - "You can blow out a candle .. but you cant blow out a fire ... once the flames begin to catch ... the wind will blow it higher".
We are doing nothing to go after the ideology that fuels these nut jobs .. and this is a big problem.
RE: These Military Vets Have Found A Smarter Way To Fight The War On Terror
⁜→ Giftedone, et al,
Yes, those that are convinced that the "key" and "essential" factor that keeps the momentum going in an insurgency is some "ideology" can focus their energies to the Psychological Warfare (PSYOPS) side of the equation. But, that will be utterly ineffective is the "key" and "essential" factor is something else.
Influences that impact motivation and behaviors are NOT limited to ideologies. For instance, the organization HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) some think ideologically driven. And at first, blush, based solely on the Charter (198, that might be a reasonable conclusion. Up front, HAMAS has been gradually rebranding their image. This shift has been documented by the late Political Director Khaled Mashal with a release in late 2012 and then another in 2017 (before he retired). It is clear that like many groups, there was a shift from Jihadism to radical political leadership for personal gain in wealth and character. Similarly, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has several shifts in motivating factors. While Yasser Arafat dressed the part of Che Guevara tactical-wear insurgent operator, even he was pocketing funds in the millions. Today's PLO leader (Mahmoud Abbas) wears suits that cost $5K to $7K each. It is all about wealth and power that motivates them to do what they do. And today's need for President Abbas to pay terrorists is all about mercenary control.
I'll pay terrorists' salaries until my dying ...
PA Chairman: I'll pay terrorists' salaries until my dying day
Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas tells the US that he won't
stop paying terrorists' families 'even if it costs him his position ...
Combating ideology is not going to temper jihadism that quietly drive by those that covet wealth and power.
Hamas is not a great example. There is a difference between going after people simply on the basis that they are not a particular brand of extremist Islam and fighting against an occupying force. The Israeli/Pal thing is a blood feud - with both sides engaging in tit for tat acts of terror. Hamas does not act outside of this conflict in any significant way. What I am referring to is the groups brainwashed by the Saudi brand of extremist Islam. Taliban, ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, and numerous others around the world.
Good point about those FUNDING the terrorists in order to line their own pockets and to be fair, they are no different than the warmongers on our own side becoming obscenely wealthy off the blood and sacrifices of our own finest men and women in uniform.
The warmongers are BOTH sides should be treated as criminal mob bosses and prosecuted under statutes like RICO in the ICC in the Hague.
It might help if we were not also funding terrorists. Al Qaeda - ISIS - in Syria - as pointed out in excruciating detail numerous times.
A great indicator good vs evil and how corrupt our political establishment is, is those that desire to fund terrorists.
The numbers are not good. When the "Stop arming terrorist act" was put before the house it received a total of 13 cosigners (bipartisan).
13 our of 435. I forgot the exact number when the vote happened but it was something like 30.
When Rand Paul introduced this bill to the Senate - it got a total of ZERO cosigners.
That's a whole lot of love for terrorists.
What is wrong with having a "secular" attitude ? I really don't understand this nonsense narrative.
Do you even know what you are saying or are you really a fan of Theocracy ?
Regardless - there are quite a number of people in this world that agree with you... more than a billion. The Islamist's hate the dreaded "Secularism". They hate individual liberty and want to force their religious beliefs on others through physical violence (Law).
Or to be more explicit that is a whole lot of love for the warmongering Military-Industrial-Complex that will have to be pried out of the cold dead hands of the GREED OBSESSED Wall Street Casino Bosses.
I have to disagree. Congenital poverty and the failure of a State to provide basic services for it;s citizens (and avenues for them to progress) always leads to radicalism. In Europe this lead to various strains of anarchist ideology and then finally to Communism. In those parts of the globe with a high % of Muslims it leads to radical Jihadist ideologies. Even in the United States and other parts of the 'first world' today the growing divide between the 'rich' and the 'poor' is leading to increasing levels of protest.
The chief difference at the moment is that the first world still has effective governments that are able (for the most part) to deliver realtivly effective public infrastructure and social services like education and heath care. Ask yourself - if you took those things away would the West be less radicalized than other parts of the world whee those things are absent?
I am not sure what you are disagreeing with as I agree with your premise. Poverty creates a fertile ground for extreme ideology. This is just a historical fact. The Bolshevik revolution in Russia is a prime example - Speeches from the Roman Senate are rife with examples of this premise - pondering over how to keep the poor fed so they did not revolt. This is not just a historical fact - it is a historical imperative.
This does not however detract from my premise. Poverty creates a fertile ground for extremism - what fills that void is another question. Just because people want change -does not mean they need to turn to extremist Islamist ideology. There are many other ideologies that one could adopt.
There is also the fact that it is not just poor folks that get suckered into this extremist ideology - the rich and poor alike have fallen into the mind control trap.
The thing about mind control is that if the person realizes they are under the influence of mind control - they are no longer under its influence. No cult member thinks they are under the influence of mind control. Religious folks in general and Political Partisans do not believe this about themselves either. Propaganda is very effective in controlling the masses - because the masses do not realize that have been influenced.
The way to combat this is with information/education. Killing or persecuting a partisan only adds fuel to the ideology and gives credibility to those that are promoting these ideologies.
There is a reason why Politicians, elite bureaucratic pundits, and the MSM refuses to educate people on what the root problems with Islamist ideology are. It is not some accident.
'Winning hearts and minds' has long been an important strategy in the US Military's arsenal. They just havn't been very good at implimenting/acheiving it in the ME/Islamic regions due in no small part to severe differences in cultural values and priorities. This (OP) seems a step in the right direction.
RE: These Military Vets Have Found A Smarter Way To Fight The War On Terror
⁜→ Derideo_Te, Giftedone, et al,
BLUF: Successfully Combating Terrorism requires a custom tailored strategy with surgical execution. You cannot wait around, just do it and like cutting cancer out, you have to get it all.
All career politicians are in it for an opportunity to get at the twin seductions: Wealth and Power
Unless you are prepared to alter the "Republic," you cannot "treated as criminal mob bosses and prosecuted under statutes like RICO in the ICC." A politician is what it is. In a Republic, where politicians grow, harbors a virus. Individually, the people can demonstrate in a positive way → their appreciation for their representative. But then, when you immerse the home politician into the cauldron of Congress, the interaction between all the representatives that individual was good, begin to mutate and coalesce into something evil that was not there before. And that is → when looking at them individually, you see a positive entity. But collectively → they (at first) intermingle and then combine to create a tumor.
OK, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the last "absolute monarchies" (the others being Brunie, Swaziland, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates).
But like all countries, the character of the general population is multifaceted. The very last thing that a Monarch (with absolute power) wants is a faith-based extremist as a rival for power. The Kingdom does not invest in Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence (your Taliban, ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, etc); although almost every country has domestic extremist. Those that were subjects exposed to methodical systems that effect change in attitudes and modifying beliefs, originating from some sort of totalitarian platform (religious, political, military, etc) are just one of several types of characters and actors that must be grappled.
Entities like those mentioned, will either evolve or fade away and died. While the Irish Republican Army has it shadow → Sinn Fein, and the Irgun produced Meachem Begin and the Likud Party, and Hezbollah holding seats in Parliament → many Asymmetric groups have evolved to the point that they use membership in political in Parliament as the anchor for their recognition and legitimacy. And, of course, HAMAS holding 74 (56%) parliamentary seats (a majority by itself) a designated terrorist group as an elected government.
The main point here is that you can cut off the head of the beast - but this will not kill the beast unless the root cause of this ideology is attacked - and politicians and the MSM refuse to do this.
You seem to echo this point at the end of your post. Where I disagree is with your inference with respect to the absolute monarchy of El Saud. While I agree that they do not want an Islamist extremist group as a rival... it is also a fact that Islamist extremism is the main key to their power and control over society. This control extends not just to Saudi Arabia - but the other Gulf nations over which El Saud has influence and/or the leaders of these nations keep control over the masses through similar extremist Islamist ideology - Saudi inspired ideology.
Hamas is not exporting its brand of extremism all over the world. Saudi is. Groups like Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, ISIS - and so on - are not emulating Hamas. They are following the Saudi inspired extremist ideology - and ideology that it has been exporting around the world for decades - in many cases arming and supporting these groups.
Apologies. I should have been more direct with my arguments. Firstly while yes, there are rich/well educated individuals who end up spiraling into various different radical ideologies at odds with their upbringing the number of such people is realtivly few. IMO one of the laughable (if that is the correct term) delusions of ISIS, even at the height of their influence was their naive belief that they could build an modern 'Caliphate' from their recruit base. With the exception of a handful of well trained IT experts, engineers and doctors etc the vast majority of their recruits were either illiterate and unskilled 'local's or western imports who for the most part were unemployed (and unemployable) drop outs. Even assuming they had been left alone to build their 'Islamist Empire' the result would have been a disaster - unless they co-opted vast numbers of trained teachers, medical, staff, public administrators etc (all of whom would desert at the first opportunity) it was doomed to fail.
Secondly, I'm not sure you can defeat these radical ideologies by 'teaching' the effected societies anything. Lessons like this have to be learned (usually the hard way) by such societies not taught. The best you can hope to do is demonstrate the effectiveness and benefits of certain Western ideals with regards democracy, the rule of law and free enterprise economics. Trying to impose them on societies not ready to accept them is fraught with difficulties, Afghanistan being a case in point.
I guess it means finding where they burying their gold and hiding their toys and confiscating them..
Interestingly, most do not even seem to be aware that the PLO is still in operation, and controls a large chunk of Palestine.
Palestine itself is a fractured state, controlled by 2 different factions.
You have the official leadership, the Palestinian Authority and the President of the Palestinian Authority. He is a member of the Fatah Party, the direct descendent of Yasser Arafat's PLO. And pretty much since the founding they have been involved in a civil war with Hamas. Fatah controls the Jordan Strip, Hamas controls the West bank.
Fatah and the Jordan Strip has actually been rather peaceful with Israel for decades, the majority of the attacks and aggression against Israel comes from Hamas in the West Bank. Yasser and his followers have reached an accommodation with Israel, it is Hamas that is continuing the fighting.
You know your stuff.
It goes back to "Know your enemy", or in my case the geopolitical situation in most areas of the world where there is conflict.
The PLO largely learned from the lessons of Black September, and the Lebanese Civil War. Once they realized that an accommodation could be made with Israel for both to co-exist peacefully, the PLO took it. Their "Death to Israel" style of behavior died with the 1993 Oslo Accords, and since then the PLO and Israel has had a fairly stable relationship. There has been some friction here and there (as there is between any 2 nations), but nothing like what has been happening between Israel and Hamas.
In fact, Fatah and Hamas itself has essentially been involved in a "civil war" since 1993. There have been attempts over the years to reconcile the 2 sides, but each has ultimately failed. The current phase started in 2006 when a coalition government could not be formed between the two sides, and is ongoing to this day.
That is one of the main reasons most nations are dragging their feet on official recognition. At one time in 2007 they actually reached an accommodation and formed a coalition government, only for Hamas to overthrow this coalition and declare itself the sole power in Palestine.
And that is how things rest even today. A fairly peaceful Jordon Strip controlled by Fatah, a hostile West Bank controlled by Hamas that still launches rocket and missile attacks, and sends over armed groups to conduct attacks inside of Israel.
Too bad you're not an ambassador there.
Never happen. As I have stated many times in here, I hate politics. Despise it and hold political animals in contempt is actually more accurate.
Separate names with a comma.