4 ms·
> Does this mean Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations will go bankrupt after their state sponsored funding dries up? Yes. > All I can see from this is
by csomar 6y ago
> Does this mean Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations will go bankrupt after their state sponsored funding dries up?
Yes.
> All I can see from this is more instability in the Middle-East which means more bad news in the years to come...
No. I predict more stability. There is less financing for violence, and less wealth to fight over.
> Perhaps Turkey will take up a bigger role in the future for policing the Middle East as they have a more diversified economy?
Too expensive. Also the fact that they are after Libya means they are not imaginative enough for a post-oil economy. So probably no.
- zippy5 6y agoLook around the world. The countries that have the most violence are: 1) Poor (Less to lose) 2) Have high levels of ideological radicals (beliefs strong enough to rationalize their worst actions) 3) Have a violent history. (Vengeance oriented)
- akimball 6y ago"Less to lose" is a pretty coarse attribution. While true tautologically, I would argue that it is misleading. The poor lack the power to institutionalize violence. The overwhelming bulk of violence is institutional. Large populations of poor imply small, threatened, populations of rich, who institutionalize the violence required to preserve their power, and then use their control to insure that their violence is left out of the accounting.
- zippy5 6y agoYou’re right. Poverty is more likely caused by violence than violence is caused by poverty.