In the pre-internet world, the hardest thing for terrorist groups was to propagandize to their local supporters, for fundraising, etc. They used to have to hav

In the pre-internet world, the hardest thing for terrorist groups was to propagandize to their local supporters, for fundraising, etc. They used to have to have elaborate networks for distributing audio tapes, video tapes, etc. These days, with the internet, it's not only easy/affordable to reach the local constituents, but also to reach foreign audiences. ISIS is the first modern terrorist group, in this sense. Much of its propaganda is designed specifically to intimidate westerners watching from home. Modern terrorism capitalizes on the free PR that the recipient group provides. Mainstream TV networks have giving ISIS tens of millions of dollars worth of free publicity. Terrorist groups are "big tent" groups, much like western political parties. Donors may think they are donating for food and infrastructure, but some of that money may go to fund bombings, etc. The goal of war is to break the will of the enemy. Terrorism is a useful tactic, which is why it is used by the West via drone strikes and fear campaigns. If you have a small budget, terrorism is a far cheaper way to attempt to break the will of the enemy than conventional warfare, and its successes and failures play out over a longer period of time. The US, while it doesn't have a small budget, has very little tolerance for aspects of war that appear to the public as messy or gruesome, which is why we choose drone strikes and other low-budget ways to attempt to break the will of our enemies. Terrorism is not guerrilla warfare, as the article claims, but propaganda warfare. The symbolic strike is everything. The more fear created by strikes, the more effective they are.