Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134594)	5/27/2004 2:05:30 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

Follow the money, cnyndwllr. Terrorist networks don't come cheap! You find a big one, you will also find either a state sponsor or a massive extortion or drug smuggling operation to pay for it. Thus, either a terrorist-supporting state or a failed state. Because there are limited means of raising the millions of dollars that a big network needs. Bingo!! Terrorist organizations are NOT FOR PROFIT criminal organizations attempting to gain "legitimacy" as state governments. But that stretches (severely) the definition of "legitimacy", as well as ignoring the fact that totalitarian regimes are seldom more than former terrorist organizations that have seized control of the politico-economic power within a geographically defined state. For people like CD to claim that terrorist organizations don't rely upon state sponsorship is to completely mis-state the reality. Can terrorist groups exist within democratic states? Surely. But can they actually prosper without the support of non-democratic groups, and/or groups who provide them moral, financial, and logistical support. Hell no... That's why we haven't see groups like the KKK, or Aryan Nations actually foster sufficient support to actually challenge democracy within this country. But it IS how we saw terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda rise to power.. Via support and financing from various Arab states, including Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. But when we have the ability to help moderate and anti-terrorist factions WITHIN these governments to confront and oppose their militant factions, it's worth pursuing such a course so long as they are willing to do so.. Hawk

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134594)	5/27/2004 3:39:53 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Follow the money, cnyndwllr. Terrorist networks don't come cheap! You find a big one, you will also find either a state sponsor or a massive extortion or drug smuggling operation to pay for it. Thus, either a terrorist-supporting state or a failed state. Because there are limited means of raising the millions of dollars that a big network needs. other means of paying for it. Hello Nadine. There are some important assumptions that are implied in your post. You're correct that "big networks" require big money in the sense of the Bin Laden network but that's only one model for terrorist networks. The simple fact is that there are few barriers to entry if you want to effectively engage in terrorism. The DC snipers had a modified junker car and a decent rifle. The Madrid bombers were more sophisticated and the 9/11 group was well financed and highly organized. The point is, however, that terrorist networks can be extremely effective in many of their aims without being "big" in a command structure sense, without raising millions of dollars of funding, and certainly without reliance upon a failed state or supportive state. When I refer to achieving "their aims" I mean that they can alter behaviors of entire populations, can secure tremendous publicity, and can initiate a change in actions that they want altered. It's the ideas and the popular support that must be addressed if we're to make a long term reduction in an escalating problem with world terrorism. All of our aggressive actions against nation states, all of our use of blunt military force and all of our other efforts to "kill" the ideas or suppress those that endorse them will not "fix" the problem. If we press down in one area the terror will simply restructure and pop up somewhere else. We'll BEGIN to have a handle on the solution when we convince the world's peoples that terrorism is not necessary for them to get a fair hearing on their grievances against the major powers, when we've shown that the major powers are willing to subject themselves to fairly and justly established rules of international law, and that nations will be left to find their own paths to the future without interference in their internal affairs except for certain well thought out and well defined exceptions. That's why to say, as Hawk seemed to, that terror is a state sponsored issue that needs to be addressed with aggressive actions against nations, is clearly incorrect. (As I wrote this I had a mental image of the gophers in the movie "Caddy Shack." Hawk is the crazed guy with the detonator in his hand and the charge right under his feet. Sig and Bill are off to the side hollering "push the plunger, push the plunger, PUSH THE PLUNGER." I just hope I'm not the guy on the third tee that's going to go up with them.)

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134594)	5/27/2004 3:41:00 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Terrorist networks don't come cheap! No kidding. I wonder who among the Arabs and Persians financed the April insurgency in Iraq which has fizzled so badly. Someone took a Baath.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134594)	5/28/2004 3:21:52 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<Terrorist networks don't come cheap! You find a big one, you will also find either a state sponsor or a massive extortion or drug smuggling operation to pay for it.> Tim McVeigh did it on a shoestring. He didn't even need to buy a truck. It doesn't really cost much to buy some box-cutters and a one-way ticket. But some large scale insurrections do cost real money and for that, you need something like the cash flow that Americans provided to the terrorist IRA who enjoyed blowing people up for a couple of decades. Especially if they also have pretensions to political power, which Tim didn't have. American money funded blowing up the Margaret Thatcher government at Brighton. BTW, who funded the Jewish terrorists in Palestine against the British and Palestinians? That must have taken serious money. I suppose it was Americans again. Saddam was funding bus-bombing in Israel, and I dare say a lot more besides, so that's one source of terrorist funding which has dried up. We need more drying up at source. It's an ill wind that blows nobody good. At least since the 911 attack, Americans aren't supposed to fund terrorist actions and they realize that being on the receiving end of terrorism isn't all fun. Mqurice