Terrorism — Past and Present
Published in Ziare.com
(Romania) on 17 March 2010
by Arsene Cosmin Madalin (link to original)
(Romania) on 17 March 2010
by Arsene Cosmin Madalin (link to original)
Translated from
by Andreea Muntean.
Edited by Jessica Boesl.
During the afternoon of March 4, a man named John Patrick Bedell drove from California and opened fire on the security agents at the entrance of the Pentagon, but was later killed. The attack came exactly two weeks after software engineer Joseph Stack flew his own plane into a United States’ government building in Texas, and also after the armed incident in which a military psychiatrist (Nidal Hasan) killed 13 people at the military base in Fort Hood, Texas.
While U.S. government officials say these incidents are not considered terrorist acts, Stratfor analysts disagree, arguing that the official definition of a “terrorist act” does not include details on the degree of violence involved, hence are incomplete, and that the ways terrorism manifests itself are continuously evolving.
The term “terrorism” has lately become one with extremely negative connotations, which is perfectly understandable if we look back on the attacks of radical Islamists on 9/11, the attacks on Madrid trains in 2004, or those on the London subway in 2005, all of which resulted in significant material damage and loss of human lives.
However, this kind of attack does not necessarily have to be of a catastrophic proportion in order to be considered a terrorist act. Al-Qaida leader Nasir al-Wahayshi himself sent out a message drawing attention to the importance of simple attacks against a variety of targets.
At the same time, terrorist attacks are not necessarily related to foreign issues. It is true that, in recent years, the attacks have been planned by radical Islamic groups in the Middle East and Southern Asia, but terrorism can not be attributed to just one particular ideology or group. It is, in fact, a tactic, and it can be used by virtually anyone who has political objectives.
If we were to look back on the history of terrorist attacks against the United States, we would notice that most of them were executed by internal groups, such as the ones militating for the rights of citizens of color, anarchist groups, anti-abortion groups, etc. Even the most recent attacks on American soil were planned out by such internal groups, but whose ideologies and inspiration came from outside.
Also, the attacks do not have to be a part of a larger conspiracy, but can be carried out by only one person. In fact, these are the most dangerous ones because of the privacy in which the individual acts are planned and also because of the infinitely lower chances of being uncovered.
Looking at the cases of Bedell, Stack and Hasan from a wider historical perspective, they could be labeled as terrorist acts. But, as Stratfor says, if these incidents are not seen as terrorist attacks, it is possible that important information will be overlooked, which could be important for understanding and preventing other such events.
While U.S. government officials say these incidents are not considered terrorist acts, Stratfor analysts disagree, arguing that the official definition of a “terrorist act” does not include details on the degree of violence involved, hence are incomplete, and that the ways terrorism manifests itself are continuously evolving.
The term “terrorism” has lately become one with extremely negative connotations, which is perfectly understandable if we look back on the attacks of radical Islamists on 9/11, the attacks on Madrid trains in 2004, or those on the London subway in 2005, all of which resulted in significant material damage and loss of human lives.
However, this kind of attack does not necessarily have to be of a catastrophic proportion in order to be considered a terrorist act. Al-Qaida leader Nasir al-Wahayshi himself sent out a message drawing attention to the importance of simple attacks against a variety of targets.
At the same time, terrorist attacks are not necessarily related to foreign issues. It is true that, in recent years, the attacks have been planned by radical Islamic groups in the Middle East and Southern Asia, but terrorism can not be attributed to just one particular ideology or group. It is, in fact, a tactic, and it can be used by virtually anyone who has political objectives.
If we were to look back on the history of terrorist attacks against the United States, we would notice that most of them were executed by internal groups, such as the ones militating for the rights of citizens of color, anarchist groups, anti-abortion groups, etc. Even the most recent attacks on American soil were planned out by such internal groups, but whose ideologies and inspiration came from outside.
Also, the attacks do not have to be a part of a larger conspiracy, but can be carried out by only one person. In fact, these are the most dangerous ones because of the privacy in which the individual acts are planned and also because of the infinitely lower chances of being uncovered.
Looking at the cases of Bedell, Stack and Hasan from a wider historical perspective, they could be labeled as terrorist acts. But, as Stratfor says, if these incidents are not seen as terrorist attacks, it is possible that important information will be overlooked, which could be important for understanding and preventing other such events.
Previous article![]( "Was George W. Bush Right After All?")
