3 ms·
Protecting anyone hasn't historically been a concern for terrorists at all. Islamic terrorists, in particular, hit entirely Muslim targets all the time. And no
by bayesian_horse 9y ago
Protecting anyone hasn't historically been a concern for terrorists at all. Islamic terrorists, in particular, hit entirely Muslim targets all the time.
And no, even then, production and delivery isn't easy. There are no pathogens which are both highly infectious and highly pathogenic, both because those traits are mutually inhibiting, and such a pathogen would already have run its course in the world. Any attempt to increase infectiousness and pathogenic potential, however, would require a very large foot print, virtually guaranteeing discovery by law enforcement.
- ben_w 9y ago“Islamic” is probably the wrong level to group them. I would be surprised if many people in Daesh are cool with their own terrorists killing lots of Daesh supporters no matter how many Shia Muslims they kill without losing sleep.
- bayesian_horse 9y agoI did mean the group of terrorists who refer to some version of Islam (as by their interpretation), and regardless which subtype in this group, they all seem to be killing a lot of muslims, again without particular regard of which kind of muslim. I admit this is an overgeneralisation, and there is a lot of subtle details with significance, but my point was simply that terrorists often don't care about their "partisan" civilians.