Thread: What makes terrorists?

Which, ironically, is using terror to try to stop terror.

Oooo, stop the presses: now terrorists can pick out U.S. citizens using their new RFID passports to target them:

UNEASYsilence » The RFID passport was hacked? Say it ain’t so!

Thank God I have one of the older ones and it's still good for 10 more years.

Originally Posted by surasak

Which, ironically, is using terror to try to stop terror.

Who is using terror to fight/stop terror?

UK/US/AUS.

Is not the message of "terrorize us and we will invade you" any different from "invade us and we will terrorize you?"

My head's spinning, again in slow motion please, surasak.

Originally Posted by surasak

UK/US/AUS.

Is not the message of "terrorize us and we will invade you" any different from "invade us and we will terrorize you?"

IMO, from your statement above, I assume that you would do nothing when attack by terrorists. Just let them blow up the place and leave in peace. No problem man. Is that true?

Well, you don't burn down the entire apartment building because someone inside either takes a hostage or threatens to rob a bank.

If the assumption is that terrorists attack us because we have our troops in their countries doesn't it make sense that by putting MORE of our troops therer it will only encourage MORE attacks in the future?

FCOL go after the terrorists. You don't need to invade nations and topple governments to do that.

Originally Posted by stroller

My head's spinning, again in slow motion please, surasak.

Ok, think of it this way: have the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan solved the problem of terrorism? Not at all. In fact, said invasions have made it worse. We aren't safer because of what we've done since 9-11. We've only made people angrier.

Why is that? Because we fail to understand the problem and we think that by invading a country and 'reforming it' in our own image it will work. It doesn't.

Has a national military force ever been successful against guerillas in another country? I think we can come up with many more instances where guerillas have been successful.

But we destroyed Al Zarquavi, and democratic elections were held in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Isn't this the way forward?
Soon the Iraqis will be shopping at Walmart and leave behind their barbaric beliefs.

Sorry, I'm drunk, I'll log off now

Originally Posted by surasak

If the assumption is that terrorists attack us because we have our troops in their countries doesn't it make sense that by putting MORE of our troops therer it will only encourage MORE attacks in the future?

FCOL go after the terrorists. You don't need to invade nations and topple governments to do that.

We had no troops in their country when they flew planes into buildings in NYC.

We have terrorists attacking our troops because, so far, the US has not gone after the base/support of these terrorist - Syria - Iran.

No kidding because we attacked the wrong country!

But, that begs the question: was any nation responsible for 9-11? There has been no proof of such.

In fact, the terrorists involved in 9-11 were privately financed and well financed. So, even the poverty characteristic was flawed.

Unless there was state sponsored terrorism we have no business invading and toppling governments.

Originally Posted by surasak

No kidding because we attacked the wrong country!

But, that begs the question: was any nation responsible for 9-11? There has been no proof of such.

In fact, the terrorists involved in 9-11 were privately financed and well financed. So, even the poverty characteristic was flawed.

Unless there was state sponsored terrorism we have no business invading and toppling governments.

Right we should have hit Iran and Syria first and took out Sadam the first time he opened his mouth. Following this action we should have went after the Taliban and 911 terrrorist whereever they were.

State sponsored terrorism--I repeat myself hit Iran and Syria first. Both of them have been sponsoring terrorism for a long time now.

If we had hit Iran and Syria we would have no problems with Irak today and Lebanon would be sitting there smiling and happy.

Have they directly been responsible for an attack on U.S. soil?

As a civilized person I would go over and apprehend him and then call the police.

I'm guessing that you'd wipe him out?

Intersting parallel: you recall, of course, the role of the United States in the coup of Iran, 1953? We supported the Shah in exchange for cheap oil. Kind of ironic considering Iraq right now.

So, wouldn't the attack on the embassy in 1979 simply have been a matter of 'getting even?'

Originally Posted by surasak

As a civilized person I would go over and apprehend him and then call the police.

I'm guessing that you'd wipe him out?

Intersting parallel: you recall, of course, the role of the United States in the coup of Iran, 1953? We supported the Shah in exchange for cheap oil. Kind of ironic considering Iraq right now.

So, wouldn't the attack on the embassy in 1979 simply have been a matter of 'getting even?'

I will be nice and just say ok to your first answer. To your question, whould I wipe him out, in a fucken heartbeat. No doubts about it. I am only civilized to a point.

I only remember reading about the Shah thing. I was not into news that much then.

The attack was a matter of getting even or not?? It was still on U.S.Soil.
I am also not sure it was getting even, more like, throwing us out in a very rough manner.

Read up on life under the Shah post-1953 and then tell me whether or not the embassy attack was justified or not.(not saying it was but everyone loves to ignore the past to justify what we ought to do in the present when what we did in the past has much bearing on what's wrong with the present).

Save you some time:

SAVAK was founded in 1957 with the assistance of the CIA and the Israeli Mossad. Its mission was to place opponents of the Shah's regime under surveillance and to repress dissident movements through intimidation, exile, imprisonments, assassinations, and torture. Its first director was General Teymur Bakhtiar, who was replaced by General Hassan Pakravan who was executed by the Revolutionary Guard after the Islamic Revolution. Pakravan was replaced in 1965 by General Nematollah Nassiri, a close associate of the Shah, and the service was reorganized and became increasingly active in the face of rising Islamic and Communist militancy and political unrest.

SAVAK had virtually unlimited powers of arrest and detention. It operated its own detention centers, like the notorious Evin Prison. It is universally accepted that SAVAK routinely subjected detainees to physical torture. In addition to domestic security the service's tasks extended to the surveillance of Iranians (especially students on government stipends) abroad, notably in the United States, France, and the United Kingdom.

And you wonder why Iranians hate America and Israel?

Originally Posted by kerux

The fact that Iran spends millions of dollars on Hebolah.
The fact that Iran sends thousands of katusha rockets into southern lebanon.
The fact that the Iranian president has essentially declared war on Israel.

Care to support any of those 'facts?'

And USrael has n't essentially declared war on Iran?

Iran: State Sponsorship of Hezbollah

Iran is believed to fund Hezbollah to the tune of at least $100 million per year. Recently, Western diplomats and analysts in Lebanon estimated Hezbollah receives closer to $200 million a year from Iran. (10) The increase is likely due to Iran’s keen interest in undermining prospects for Israeli-Palestinian peace (and, in general, further destabilizing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict), and Hezbollah’s growing role as Iran’s proxy to achieve this goal. Hezbollah success in funding and training Palestinian groups—not just the Iran’s interest in it—may well explain the increase in funding since Iran is known to employ a results-oriented approach to determining the level of funding it is willing to provide terrorist groups. As a U.S. court noted in Weinstein v. Iran, the period of 1995-1996 “was a peak period for Iranian economic support of Hamas because Iran typically paid for results, and Hamas was providing results by committing numerous bus bombings such as the one on February 25, 1996.” (11) Iranian funding to terrorist groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad (most often funneled via Hezbollah) increases when they carry out successful attacks and decreases when they fail, are thwarted or are postponed due to ceasefires or other political considerations.

Some of this financial support comes in the form of cash funds, while much is believed to come in the form of material goods such as weapons. Iranian cargo planes deliver sophisticated weaponry, from rockets to small arms, to Hezbollah in regular flights to Damascus from Tehran. These weapons are offloaded in Syria and trucked to Hezbollah camps in Lebanon’s Beka’a Valley. In the wake of the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Hezbollah reportedly received an additional $22 million from Iranian intelligence to support Palestinian terrorist groups and foment instability. (12)

Iran also funnels money to Hezbollah through purportedly private charities closely affiliated with the revolutionary elite led by Supreme Leader Khomeoni that controls such key Iranian institutions as the intelligence and security services, the judiciary, and the revolutionary council. Mohammed Raad, leader of Hezbollah’s “Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc” in the Lebanese parliament, readily accedes that the group receives funds from Iran, but maintains these are only for “health care, education and support of war widows.” (13)

Beyond this tangible support, however, Iran also provides Hezbollah less quantifiable financial support through the training and logistical operation support it provides the group. Indeed, the most significant modus operandi that runs through all Hezbollah global activities—financial, logistical and operational—is that at some level all Hezbollah networks are overseen by and are in contact with senior Hezbollah and/or Iranian officials.

For example, Hezbollah operatives in Charlotte, North Carolina, responded directly to Sheikh Abbas Haraki, a senior Hezbollah military commander in South Beirut. At the same time, Hezbolllah procurement agents in Canada who coordinated with the Charlotte cell worked directly with Haj Hasan Hilu Laqis, Hezbollah’s chief procurement officer who operates closely with Iranian intelligence. (14)

In Southeast Asia, members of the Hezbollah network behind a failed truck-bombing targeting the Israeli embassy in Bangkok in 1994, as well as a series of other terrorist plots in the region throughout the 1990s, were intimately tied to Iranian intelligence agents. Comprised almost entirely of local sunni Muslims, the network was led by Pandu Yudhawitna who was himself recruited by Iranian intelligence officers stationed in Malaysia in the early 1980s. (15)

Other examples include senior Hezbollah operatives and Iranian agents involved in the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, in Hezbollah's efforts to smuggle weapons to Palestinian terrorists through Jordan since 2000, in Hezbollah operations in South America (including the 1992 and 1994 bombings), and in the recruitment of Shi’a students in Uganda. (16) Throughout these and many other cases, a key common thread is the direct contact each cell maintains to senior Hezbollah and/or Iranian intelligence operatives.

Perhaps the best documented example of the operational relationship Iran maintains with Hezbollah is Tehran’s role in the Jewish community center (Asociacion Mutual Israelita Argentina , or AMIA) bombing. According to Abdolghassem Mesbahi, a high-level Iranian defector, the decision to bomb the AMIA building was made at a meeting of senior Iranian decision makers on August 14, 1993. (17) The meeting reportedly included the Supreme Leader Ali Hoseini Khamenei, former President Ali Akbar Hashemi, Rafsanjani, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Vlayati, the Head of Intelligence and Security in Khamenei’s Bureau, Mohammed Hjazi, former Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian, and Iranian secret service agent Mohsen Rabbani. (18) According to Argentinean court documents, the Argentinean intelligence service (SIDE) believes that Khameini issued a fatwa concerning AMIA. This fatwa was then handed down from Fallahian to Imad Mughniyeh, the “special operations” chief of Hezbollah. Mughniyeh worked in conjunction with Rabbani, who was able to help orchestrate the plan for the bombing clandestinely under the guise of heading the Iranian Cultural Bureau at the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires. (19) Rabbani attempted to buy a Renault-Trafic model van, the same model that was used in the bombing, and is suspected of being involved with several commercial activities through fictitious or undercover enterprises on behalf of Iranian intelligence. (20) Investigators also uncovered records of phone calls between the Iranian embassy in Buenos Aires and suspected Hezbollah operatives in the triborder area who operated out of a mosque and a travel agency there. (21)

According to expert opinions included in the Argentinean court document, it is well known that Hezbollah operatives often receive training in Iran. (22) In addition, Hezbollah prefers outside operatives to local contacts when running its major operations in other countries. These operatives generally are more trustworthy and better trained. (23) The terrorists that conducted the AMIA bombing would have had greater difficulty operating without the operational support of Iran, which reportedly included the bribing of then Argentinean President Carlos Menem with a payment of $10 million dollars to keep Iran’s involvement quiet. (24)

Iran has also supported Hezbollah’s involvement in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and support of Palestinian militants. U.S. officials contend that, shortly after Palestinian violence erupted in September 2000, Iran assigned Imad Mughniyeh, Hezbollah's international operations commander, to help Palestinian militant groups, specifically Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). (25) According to a former Clinton administration official, "Mugniyeh got orders from Tehran to work with Hamas." (26) In fact, in the March 27, 2002, "Passover massacre" suicide bombing, Hamas relied on the guidance of a Hezbollah expert to build an extra-potent bomb. (27)

Iran has also demonstrated consistent financial and logistical support of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups by establishing terrorist training programs and camps. As of August 2002, Iran was reported to have financed and established terrorist training camps in the Syrian-controlled Beka'a Valley to train Hezbollah, Hamas, PIJ and PFLP-GC terrorists to use rockets such as the short range Fajr-5 missile and the SA-7 anti-aircraft rocket. (28) The camps, including one in Khuraj near the Syrian border, were reported to be under the command of Iranian Republican Guard Corps (IRGC) General Ali Reza Tamzar, commander of IRGC activity in the Beka'a Valley. (29) According to a "Western intelligence agency" report, which puts the cost of the Iranian program at $50 million, Tamzar's IRGC detachment also trains the Lebanese and Palestinian terrorists to carry out "underwater suicide operations." (30) The Iranian terrorist training program was the result of a secret meeting held in the Tehran suburb of Darjah on June 1, 2002, in advance of a two-day conference in support of the Palestinian Intifada held in Tehran on June 1-2, 2002.

Beyond training and arming Hezbollah, Iran bankrolls the group’s well-oiled propaganda machine as well. Al-Manar is the official television mouthpiece of Hezbollah. Called the “station of resistance”—it serves as Hezbollah’s tool to reach the entire Arab Muslim world to disseminate propaganda and promote terrorist activity.

At the time of al-Manar’s founding in 1991, the station reportedly received seed money from Iran (31) and had a running budget of $1 million. By 2002 its annual budget had grown to approximately $15 million. (32) Middle East analysts and journalists maintain that most of this funding comes from Iran. (33)

Avi Jorisch, author of Beacon of Hatred: Inside Hezbollah’s al-Manar Television, writes that “Iran provides an estimated $100-200 million per year to Hezbollah, which in turn transfers money to al-Manar, making Iranian funding of the station indirect.” (34) This was confirmed by former al-Manar program director Sheikh Nasir al-Akhdar who asserted that al-Manar receives a large portion of its budget through subsidies offered by Hezbollah. (35)

linky

Originally Posted by surasak

Regarding the terrorists: if you want to capture them and bring them to justice then you must do so under the very same justice system you expect others to follow. That means capturing them and bringing them back to the U.S. for trial (if they in fact broke our laws). How many of the thousands in detainment were responsible for 9-11 or any other terrorist attack against on American soil? What right to we have to round up thousands and confine without charges and without a trial for years on end?

This just made me laugh my ass off ... what the hell kinda logic is that ?

YOU don't really think they're terrorists now do you ?

If they are terrorists and we can't prove it other than they were captured in a battle area ... do you want us to put them up at the Hilton as well for their trials ? Sorry, but it's a fact of an unconventional war ... if they don't wear uniforms to identify themselves as combatants then it's going to be a longer process to seperate the guilty from the innocent. Sounds like more PC bullshit to me ... fuck man, why don't we just arm the extermists ourselves?

Slightly off topic, but ...You remind me of these clowns back in the USA who have forgotten that places prison are primarily for punishment not rehabilitation.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by surasak

Regarding the terrorists: if you want to capture them and bring them to justice then you must do so under the very same justice system you expect others to follow. That means capturing them and bringing them back to the U.S. for trial (if they in fact broke our laws). How many of the thousands in detainment were responsible for 9-11 or any other terrorist attack against on American soil? What right to we have to round up thousands and confine without charges and without a trial for years on end?

This just made me laugh my ass off ... what the hell kinda logic is that ?

YOU don't really think they're terrorists now do you ?

If they are terrorists and we can't prove it other than they were captured in a battle area ... do you want us to put them up at the Hilton as well for their trials ? Sorry, but it's a fact of an unconventional war ... if they don't wear uniforms to identify themselves as combatants then it's going to be a longer process to seperate the guilty from the innocent. Sounds like more PC bullshit to me ... fuck man, why don't we just arm the extermists ourselves?

Slightly off topic, but ...You remind me of these clowns back in the USA who have forgotten that places prison are primarily for punishment not rehabilitation.

Captured in a battle area....what a mistake....causes much-ado-about-nothing important....takes two or more to watch one captive........the old ways are the best.....need a hint.....KILL THEM ALL-LET GOD SORT THEM OUT.

Originally Posted by Whiteshiva

You yanks get so gung-ho about "payback" when you get your nose bloodied, but yet seem so surprised when other people react the same way.

The only thing that I'm surprised about is those people in the world who support this group of extremists who do not represent the majority of people in Iraq.

The only thing that surpises me is people who can't see the forests for the trees ... these extremists want your head in a noose just as bad they want to saw mine off. An infidel is an infidel PERIOD unless you convert to Islam.

Originally Posted by ceburat

We had no troops in their country when they flew planes into buildings in NYC.

Wrong again, the US did have troops in SA when it happened. You are terribly misinformed cerubat, which explain why you are so angry and revengeful in your posts. 911 happened because you had troops stationed there. If you hadn't any troops, 911 wouldn't have happened and you guys would still have your head in the sand regarding terrorism.