Quote:
Originally Posted by MTI
There will always be some terrorism as a means of evoking change, there always has been. The current philosophical mindset of being in a "war" has more to do with there being a spectacular attack on our own soil.
When homegrown terrorist like McVie or the Unabomber did their work, was a "war" declared? If so, I missed it. Even when the initial attempt on bombing the World Trade Center occured, was there a war . . . or a criminal investigation?
We have a "war" because there needed to be that visceral response to the attacks.
|
The difference between Mcveigh and "the war" is that Mcveigh was a member of a small minority group that used terrorism to prove a point. As you pointed out, every country has this to some extent or the other. Basques in Spain, Tamil's in Sri Lanka. Ours are fortunatly small in number and have been largely defanged after Oklahoma.
The current struggle is differentiated by numerous groups, worldwide, that share the same ideology and have made numerous attacks in a multitude of countries. They have an international network, financial and otherwise (less so financial than 5 years ago). They had large support in the past from sovereign nations including Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. Currently only the goverments of Iran and Syria are the main state sponsors of terrorism. Radical Islam is the key similarity between all groups. Radical Islam has an end goal of destroying any conflicting philosophy whether it be religous or secular. Anything that is not Islam.
We have a war because there is a large concerted force, worth paying attention to, that has declared war on us; about 20 years ago.