terrorism as an excuse for imperialism?
545814
I don't know that I would go so far as to say they would reach for imperialism, but it is true that governments will take advantage of the fear caused by terrorism to usurp some of the citizens rights.  We saw this after 911, and it will be a long time before it gets set right again.
624491
you are. no doubt about it. on one side u are talking about humanity on the other hand Hiroshima & Nagasaki.on one hand you are talking about fighting against terrorism on the other hand you are neglecting(or helping?) Pakistan. on one hand you are asking China to retreat from chinies taipei on the other hand you are occuping Afganistan,Iraq and Iran on the agenda next. you want the world to be under your foot. but never forget Hitler, Musolini, Alexander the great,Japan they all failed. where are you heading for? as far as China, India,Israel is concerned you will be axing the branch on which you are sitting. Pakistan is already under your control.
142603
Global hegemony makes us a target from terrorism.  If you want more terrorist attacks, then by all means invade sovereign nations for no real reason.  However, if you actually want to keep our country safe, it's probably best to keep our heads down.
145798
First, Imperialism is a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires, either through direct territorial conquest or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries. The US has never been a acquisition nation.\n\nNow, there has been a trend to criticize imperialism not at an economic or political level, but at a simply cultural level, particularly the widespread global influence of American culture. We have a great deal of influence on all cultures and our culture is slowly changing the world. \n\nIt comes down to how you view it.
737244
Not really. In fact, the current occupation of Iraq doesn't have anything to do with the reason we went over in the first place.\n\nWe're doing nothing more than baby-sitting the country, and acting as its local police force, while it's in the middle of a civil war. There is no evidence, none, that says anything we're doing there has any effect on global terrorism. It's purely politics and empire-building.
1011914
Terrorism exists because of misinterpretation of religious documents. It's that simple for both "I'm gonna bomb a bus" terrorism or "I'm going to beat up some gays" terrorism.
161790
Today , the world sees the arabs and particulary the muslims as uncivilised people . Let me ask you a question : Why beleve the media ? Why beleve the western polititians ? Why does western people differ of the arabs ? I'm not saying that their wrong , I am saying that their exagerating .This is my idea and  Bin laden has the pretty same idea . He's in anger of the lies of the western peole . He inhertitated a lot of money from his familie and he decided to use it to buy arms and defend his people . He is an honoroble man . Let me remind you that the Americans created Bin Laden to do terrorist atacks on the USSR . Figure it out yourself
66446
In their fight to create the nation of Israel zionists participated in actions against Great Britain that were they to happen today would have been considered terrorism.  The same could be said of the American Revolutionary War, the French Revolution and the Civil War.  \n\nI realize that doesn't strictly answer your question.    Here is a reference that should be useful:\nHonor and Martyrdom: Suicide Bombing Isn't as New or Alien as Westerners Imagine\n"The rate of suicide bombings - the seemingly endless supply of people prepared to blow themselves up - leaves a western audience utterly bewildered. What kind of psychology motivates people to such violent extremes? The incomprehension prompts revulsion that this form of warfare is historically unprecedented and reveals a peculiar, aberrant irrationality - a kind of inhuman madness. All too quickly, Islam is blamed for deluding its believers into martyrdom with promises of 72 virgins; the old prejudices about Islam as a faith uniquely associated with violence and unquestioning belief are fanned into life again.\n\nBut such prejudices won't get us very far in trying to unpick which elements of this violent phenomenon are in fact unprecedented and which are not - or to understand why the strategy has been adopted."
701310
Terrorism is killing or threatening to cause physical harm to a civilised society in the name of some cause. Terrorism breeds out of perceived injustice whose advantage is taken by unscrupulous elements. There are different types of terrorism- religion-based, territory-based or state-sponsored.\nIrrespective of the type of terrorism the propagators try to justify it in the name of certain cause or ideology.\n\nReligious Terrorism: Example Al-Qaida who led Muslims to believe that they have been historically mistreated and must fight to avenge that.. Truth is that such people follow no religion because no religion propagates violence.\nTerritory-based Terrorism: Example LTTE in Sri Lanka, ULFA in Assam. They believe that their territory has been 'occupied' to external forces and they must fight to overthrow their oppressors. Truth is, in most cases, these people are greedy to control and exert their power with vested interests and little interest in public welfare.\nState Sponsored: BY FAR THE MOST DANGEROUS. Example Hitler in Germany, George Bush in USA, Narendra Modi in Gujarat, Musharaf in Pakistan, who use government machinery and armed forces to spread terror. The reason it is so dangerous is because people like Hitler and George Bush have access to tremendous resources, arms and ammunition to attack soft targets to further their propoganda.\n\nRemedies:-\nEvery country must actively co-operate and ensure to root out terrorism from their soil. \nResolving issues through negotiations and via multi-lateral forums like UN.\nAllaying fears in the minds of people, by avoiding 'us against them' and 'clash of civilization'  kind of rhetorics.\nEducating people and providing employment opportunities to disillusioned youth to ensure that they utilize their energy positively.
89212
He has claimed over and over again about "terrorism" and "nuclear weapons" - weapons of mass destruction hidden in Iraq as an excuse to wage a war and suck out all the oil - blatant imperialism. And after the war, when there is no oil, Kofi Annan himself said for the first time in open - the war was illegal - but he has blinded his people and trying to show them he is being a nice guy, while all the world knows he is just avenging his dad's unfinished business and imperialistically snatching off someone else's territory. \n\nWhy should he, or anybody else for that matter, show interest to someone else's government/country. Who is he to tell the miscellaneous countries about how to run their countries and economies.\n\nWho do you think is the real terrorist now? That is why he is under the scanner.
409808
The obvious answer is because one operates from within and one from without. I think that your real query is that of motivations. The international are the age old bandits that have always existed. The real internal terrorists are a whole different thing, they can have many motivators and in all cases should not have been allowed to progress to action. The problem that generated them should be tended to in a sustainable manner not a stop gap, and not later, that's what has us here in the first place. Balance is not an option just ask nature, she is answering us now, but the evil sing to distract and take the last on the plate.
1056338
US will never succeed. Like it`s needless saying that we can prevent the bad efffects of globalization. \n\nWorld terrorism is quite a complex problem nowadays. And of course it encompasses not only anti-US movements in the Third World Countries, but also the inner terrorism in developed ones.\nLet`s take Britain, for example. A lot have been said about the origin of the sucide bombers in London Underground. And very important point is that they were Britts. Immigrants, but brits.Brits in their style, manners,views.\n\nTerrorism is not just muslim affair t all.It`s wrong statement made up only to create an enemy,which will unite a nation. I think government easily uses this tactic:we need a "small victirious war".\n\nBut the origins of the terrorism lay deep inside the structure of the society. It is probably us, who create reall terrorists. Us and people we elect. You are absolutely right about iranian family hatred with America. I think you may be also interested in the book "Why world hates America?" (unfortunattely, I have forgotten the author). \n\nDo you remembtr Huntington`s "Clashes of civilizations"? Don`t you find it somehow coincides with today situation?
740097
Your example would work better if Russia or England or China was the invader, but it's a valid point.\n\nPeople blame the Iraqi insurgents for fighting in a civil war, against a govt they didn't elect which was established when an enemy country unilaterally invaded and deposed the ruling govt. Whether we like them or not, it's fair to ask if they have reasonable grounds for defending their country against hostile occupying forces.
196624
I'm sorry I don't have the time to read all of that right now, but I plan to.  Quick question, does it define what terrorism is anywhere in there.  If it does, please tell me where so I can read that.\n\nIf not, There is my issue with it.
498190
Terrorist isn't an ethnicity.  \nHow would you target buildings that don't belong to an invisible organization with an unknown population?
435866
you've rephrased your question, so i'm just gonna repost my answer:\n\nconspiracy theories posit a centralized concentration of power that generally is simply untenable in most (though not all) cases. \nan appropriate analogy is the power disparity between a parent and a small child. having superior explicative resources, the grownup can and often does fabricate deceptive modes of understanding events (santa claus must have been here, we sent the dog to a farm where he can run around and play, etc). but these deceptions are almost always planned far in advance, and always involve a taciturn complicity on the part of the child.\nin the case of 9/11, conspiracy seems unlikely because of the suddenness and publicity of the event.\nis it possible that insidious shadow elements of the american government engineered the attacks of 9/11 in order to manufacture consent in a war and oil grab in the middle east? well--anything is possible, but this seems highly unlikely as it is a blatant violation of the principle of ockham's razor (the simplest explanation is generally correct). not only does it unnecessarily add factors by positing a near supernatural power concentration in the hidden nether regions of u.s. government, but it further assumes the complicity of huge networks throughout the middle east, including bin laden (all functioning preternaturally to maintain the shroud of secrecy). a much simpler (and therefore almost indubitably more accurate) description of events can be constructed by simply decentralizing the nodes of agency--the demands of an enormously diffuse industrialized society for large quantities of energy resources concentrated in the middle east has resulted in a need for a level of cooperation that is nigh upon impossible to sustain given the disparate ideologies of the millions of individuals engaged in the complex operation. mix in a large measure of volatile historical tension, and a destabilizing imbalance in resource distribution, then heat the situation with the complete failure of conventional warfare to develop traction, and terrorist tactics on a major level are a natural reaction--the first major bubble in a solution starting to boil. \n\nbesides, if there were an all-powerful secret society working deep behind the curtains, do you really think that the united potheads of the world are going to form a viable resistance?\n\nis everything about what happened on 9/11 transparent? no. but conspiracy theories are for people that can see some of the picture but just can't connect the dots. so they make up fantastic mythologies to connect them. \n\nby the way--lightning isn't an angry anthropomorphic god throwing bolts of electricity either.
772069
Another of Bush/Blair arguments is that the 911 attacks happened before Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded, and that means that anyone who argues that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan fuels more terrorism is wrong.\n\nThat's like saying there was a fire there already a fire there, so it doesn't matter if they throw more petrol into it. Only complete idiots without the ability to think for themselves would buy into that.\n\nAlso, the fight them there so he doesn't have to fight them at home ignores the strong possibility of home grown terrorism due to increased anger over the conflicts - 7/7 bombings are a strong case in point.