Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (134746)	5/28/2004 4:36:40 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) of 281500

almost every expert has said that terrorism is not dependent upon "state sponsorship Almost every expert has then added, "but it sure helps". Look, the kind of terrorism we care about needs big bucks. The two major terrorist networks are Al Qaeda and Hizbullah. Hizbullah gets over 100 million a year from Iran. Al Qaeda's funding is murkier, but it's clear it gets big, big bucks from Saudi sources, including princely (ie quasi governmental factions). Even a lot of the radical left terrorists of the 70s and 80s were getting Soviet help. It takes money, training, locations, safe houses to run to when the international police are chasing you and you have a big reward on your head. These things don't come cheap. Who has that kind of money? Who has the commitment not to sell you out the minute your enemies offer the better price? The answer to that usually boils down to a state of a major faction in some state somewhere, who shares ideological bonds with you. For many smaller states with a grudge, the temptations of raising a deniable strike force are very very great. One of the main reasons to put state sponsors into the crosshairs is to deter that kind of thinking.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next