When terror worked...

[Junkdrawer]

Terror as a political weapon is very difficult to use. In my memory, there was only one time when honest-to-god Arab terrorists were beginning to have their desired effect on US public opinion. In the 70s, public opinion was beginning to turn against Israel after a decade of persistent, low-level terror attacks. They key concepts here are:

1.) Persistent: the target populace must feel powerless to stop the attacks

2.) Low-Level: each individual attack must not rise to the level that demands retaliation - especially if that retaliation requires the invasion or overthrow of a foreign government.

What turned it around was a combination of America Held Hostage and the Lockerby bombing. This combination violated the 'low-level' rule and allowed Reagan to strike "decisively" against Libya and Kadafi. And because the American public felt empowered, further terror attacks would only harden support for Israel. As a result, terror all but stopped in the US.

Now we see large, widely spaced terror attacks. And they have the predictable consequences, namely to work decisively against the goals of the 'terrorists'. Is there any wonder why people are asking "Is it real, or is it Memorex?"

[Bandit]

1. The goals of the terrorist is to terrorize and they are still doing that

Just ask the GOP if they are not terrorized. People in America are scared shitless especially the "Chickenhawk" GOP elite. Why do you think everyone wants assault weapons in every household and a handgun under every pillow. It is because America is a land of scared sheep and every bomb that goes off somewhere strikes fear deeper and deeper into their hearts. We have become a nation of cowards and the terrorists know this and therefore have the upper hand. Every note they send or every video of Bin Laden sends shivers across America.

[Junkdrawer]

2. No doubt the the current round of terror has benefited BushCo...

So the question is: Have the terrorists become especially stupid, or....

[Junkdrawer]

3. Kick

:kick:

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Note that Reagan did not retaliate for Lockerbie

Lockerbie happened in December 1988, just as Reagan's term was ending; and it took a long time for the consensus view to be that Libya had done it (and the evidence for this is still not totally convincing to many).
When you say "America Held Hostage", what are you referring to? I thought that phrase was use for the embassy hostages in Iran.

Reagan's bombing of Libya, aimed at Kadafi, was in retaliation for the bombing of a disco in Germany - in Reagan's own words. If you believe Libya did do the Lockerbie bombing, then that shows Reagan's 'decisive strike' did nothing to stop terror against the US.

[Junkdrawer]

5. Good point. I mixed up the timing of the disco bombing and Lockerbie.

But still, I think that these huge terror attacks are so counter productive that they make one suspicious.