5 Myths About Terrorism

[Scriptor Ignotus]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/11/AR2007091101220.html?referrer=digg

5 Myths About Terrorism

By Alan B. Krueger
Tuesday, September 11, 2007; 12:00 AM

Six years after 9/11, all too many Americans still have only a vague idea of what does -- and doesn't -- motivate terrorists. It doesn't help that many politicians exploit the anxiety that terrorism evokes to promote their own agendas. Here are five key urban legends:

1. Terrorism is a random act carried out by irrational people who hate our way of life.

If only it were that simple. In fact, terrorists are typically motivated by geopolitical grievances, not blind hatred. The agendas of individual terrorist groups vary, but their tactical goal is always more or less the same: to sow fear and confusion by deliberately targeting civilians in order to intimidate a country into changing its policies and ways.

So political calculations are key here. Citizens of countries that occupy other countries, for example, are more likely to be targeted by terrorists. In addition, wealthy democracies are more likely to be the targets of terrorist strikes than are totalitarian regimes, which suggests that terrorists deliberately strike countries that are susceptible to public pressure.

Another reason not to see terrorist attacks as random: They're often timed to occur when they can have maximum impact, such as the eve of pivotal elections. In Israel, for example, attacks by Palestinian terrorist groups bent on sabotaging peace talks are more frequent before elections when left-wing governments hold power, in hopes of pushing Israeli voters in a more hawkish direction, according to research by Claude Berrebi of the Rand Corporation and Esteban F. Klor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

/snip

[intaglio]

1. Loyalist paramilitaries and the IRA were (once) terrorist

Why do American pundits rarely cite the IRA or the Loyalist paramilitaries as "Terrorists"?

Could it be because they are a prime example of how "Talking to Terrorists" can actually help resolve a dispute?

Or is it because they were "Christian" terrorists? (Although for many years the IRA had a Marxist/Leninist or Socialist manifesto)

Or perhaps because they were approved terrorists because of the electoral clout of the old Irish/American community?

and, yes, I do know that many of the Loyalist groups were originally UK state sponsored.