7 ms·
Maybe people didn't like your use of the term "terrorism" for national security threats? A common understanding is that terrorism is intended to frighten peopl
by schoen 5y ago
Maybe people didn't like your use of the term "terrorism" for national security threats?
A common understanding is that terrorism is intended to frighten people or make them feel unsafe, while various official definitions of terrorism include the idea that it's intended to coercively achieve some particular political goal.
If attackers just intend to get money, they're probably well-described as extortionists (or in some cases, as you said, akin to pirates). If they just intend to damage a particular society without demanding anything from it or getting it to change its behavior, they might be saboteurs.
Attacks with these motives or that pretend to have these motives could still be considered national security threats (and taken very seriously), but maybe shouldn't be described specifically as terrorism.
- squeaky-clean 5y agoThey may have just intended to get money, but they definitely spread terror. I had to have like an hour long phone call with my mother on Monday explaining why she had to go to 4 gas stations before she could get any gas, and that no the pipeline was not going to explode.
- a9h74j 5y agoFrom the satire site that shall not be named: "People in the Middle East head to bomb shelters after learning that Americans are experiencing gasoline shortages."
- mannykannot 5y agoCould it perhaps have been the use of the word 'terrorism' in news reports that prompted her fear of the pipeline exploding?
- thesuperbigfrog 5y agoOn the high seas of the Internet there is a thin line between pirates and state actors. There could even be "privateer" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer) attackers who work for a nation and for profit at the same time. From the victim's perspective it matters less who is attacking you or why they are attacking you and much more what the results of the attack are, how you can mitigate and recover from the damage, and what needs to be done to prevent future attacks. For the case of DarkSide and Colonial Pipeline, the attackers did not claim to have a political motive, but the resulting fuel shortages and panic buying might as well have been a form of terrorism.
- wongarsu 5y agoJust causing terror doesn't make it terrorism. Causing terror as a means to further some political (or religious) goal would make it terrorism.
- bluefirebrand 5y agoWith that definition this is explicitly not terrorism, because it was for money not for political or religious reasons?
- akiselev 5y agoYes. Its an important distinction because they are fundamentally different motives. If the motive is money, various strategies can drive up the cost until the behavior is no longer profitable and the bad actors stop. Religion and ideology are completely different beasts and most strategies that work on profiteers only entrench the others.
- omgwtfbbq 5y agoJust like how robbing a bank may cause terror to the people in the bank or the neighborhood but it was done for profit not politics.
- suifbwish 5y agoWealth is the primary means of expanding ones political influence. It’s a primitive tool like a talking stick to coerce all the other monkeys to do shit for you. Trying to gain money is absolutely political
- Dylan16807 5y agoI think you just defined yelling at someone over money to be terrorism. You can make a reasonable argument that "nothing is apolitical" but but that's not the definition of political being used when people say what terrorism is.
- cannabis_sam 5y agoWould the same apply for someone who physically took something essential to national security hostage and then demanded money? Would that change if they, for example, demanded the release of prisoners of a specific political persuasion?
- reader_mode 5y agoTerrorism has to have some ideological agenda, which is what makes it dangerous - I doubt you'll see suicide bombers for hire.
- adamselene 5y agoNot more than once, anyway.
- brillyfresh 5y agoOnly the ones who are bad at it.
- moftz 5y agoMoney can certainly help influence someone to wear a bomb vest, they don't need to actually believe in the cause. There could be someone out there that specializes in finding people in vulnerable financial situations that wouldn't mind blowing themselves up if it meant that their family was well taken care of.
- efuquen 5y ago> Would that change if they, for example, demanded the release of prisoners of a specific political persuasion? How would that not be classified as a political motive?
- imwillofficial 5y ago"Would that change if they, for example, demanded the release of prisoners of a specific political persuasion?" Yes. "Terrorism is, in the broadest sense, the use of intentional violence to achieve political aims." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
- jcims 5y agoHonestly I’d say any highly asymmetric violent or offensive action would lend many folks to trot out the T word.
- ngcc_hk 5y agoControl the language control everything. Good to hear from this clear mind.