Counter-terrorism // asymetrical Warfare

[alibi]

I will debate in the open and not take your wanna be everything (wannabe military, wannabe professor, wannabe sharpshooting everybody) behind the scenes.... if you want a debate, line it up in a good format.

To refute your debate - terrorism requires a government/political structure and a group trying to overthrow/disrupt that government - and yes, a resistance can be a terrorist group, and a government can be a terrorist group. You forget that I was involved in counter-terror, and FID before you were born... and yes, a political system, or group of poloitcal systems shared by a cabal of governments can be the target of terrorism - a gang, although using terrorist methodology does not fit the accepted definitions of terrorism - untl it reaches the level of the Chinese Tongs or the South/Central American Cartels - which do state they want political and economic control of whole countries/regions and the overthrow of those countries that care to stand in their way. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, ome man's advisor is another man's agent provocateur...

read up on the Baader-Meinhof Group and Brigante Rosa...

I know you have been asked to quit posting so much to stir the shit and sit back and read... it's not that you are not intelligent - you are naive and do not have the experience to back up the talk.

That was pretty much my point (Probably inarticulate as it was). Definitions will vary from person to person.

The only person who has told me to quit posting was you, on my second post, when I basically repeated Headshots comments on a necrothread. But that's neither here nor there.

The Heinlein PM was about not derailing the thread we had the discussion in. Something you said yourself you didn't want to happen in your post.

But look, I'm not interested in an internet e-fight.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Holy fuck! I will respond to this thread gone wrong tomorrow, when I can see straight!:confused:

 

[Marauder06]

I don't quite follow your last line of thinking. How do gangs profit from the government?

Organized gangs operate in the margins of the current government; they know the system and how to exploit it. A new government would mean a new system they'd have to learn, more trouble = less profit generally.

 

[JustAnotherJ]

Alibi - You're an intelligent kid, but you should chose your battles a little better and know your audience.

 

[amlove21]

Alibi - You're an intelligent kid, but you should chose your battles a little better and know your audience.

YUP.

 

[alibi]

Roger that.

 

[Marauder06]

... you should chose your battles a little better and know your audience.

Always good advice. Wish I would have known that back when I was a lieutenant.

 

[alibi]

All right guys, thanks for the advice, I'll take it and quiet down.

 

[SpitfireV]

Organized gangs operate in the margins of the current government; they know the system and how to exploit it. A new government would mean a new system they'd have to learn, more trouble = less profit generally.

No, they operate in the margins of the legal systems. Governments come and go, gang still stay, until legislation changes.

 

[Marauder06]

No, they operate in the margins of the legal systems. Governments come and go, gang still stay, until legislation changes.

I don't quite follow your logic on that one.

 

[Manolito]

I have a question? If we take the current Government and we take the Arian Brotherhood I think I could make the case that they (the gang) wants to overthrow the current government and I think this for a lot of different reasons. The weathermen are also a group I think a solid connection could be made to call them terrorists. Inside the borders of the US would you call the Muslim Brotherhood a gang or a terrorist organization?
When you advocate returning to a conservative constitution government are you a fundamentalist or a terrorist?
Bill

 

[Marauder06]

I have a question? If we take the current Government and we take the Arian Brotherhood I think I could make the case that they (the gang) wants to overthrow the current government and I think this for a lot of different reasons. The weathermen are also a group I think a solid connection could be made to call them terrorists. Inside the borders of the US would you call the Muslim Brotherhood a gang or a terrorist organization?
When you advocate returning to a conservative constitution government are you a fundamentalist or a terrorist?
Bill

first part- terrorist.

second part- depends on your methods.

 

[Servimus]

I have a question? If we take the current Government and we take the Arian Brotherhood I think I could make the case that they (the gang) wants to overthrow the current government and I think this for a lot of different reasons. The weathermen are also a group I think a solid connection could be made to call them terrorists.

I'd definitely call the Weathermen domestic terrorists. They wanted a change in governmental policy and their methods were violent and used intimidation.

As for returning to a conservative gov- If you're not engaging in violence at all I don't see how you could be a terrorist.

 

[AWP]

I have a question? If we take the current Government and we take the Arian Brotherhood I think I could make the case that they (the gang) wants to overthrow the current government and I think this for a lot of different reasons. The weathermen are also a group I think a solid connection could be made to call them terrorists. Inside the borders of the US would you call the Muslim Brotherhood a gang or a terrorist organization?
When you advocate returning to a conservative constitution government are you a fundamentalist or a terrorist?
Bill

1. Terrorist
2. Fundamentalist

Terrorism isn't defined by just an end state, it is also defined by the method to arrive there.

 

[SpitfireV]

I don't quite follow your logic on that one.

What I mean is they operate/profit by exploitation of the legalities of certain commodities/actions rather than by the presence of the government itself. These laws are in place regardless of which government is sitting at the time.

 

[x SF med]

What I mean is they operate/profit by exploitation of the legalities of certain commodities/actions rather than by the presence of the government itself. These laws are in place regardless of which government is sitting at the time.

If they chose to change the government to a differnt state (democracy to socialist dictatorship or fascist state where they wwere involved in the policies of governing and social controls... they'd be terrorists - as they are, they are criminals who use some terrorist strategies to force their own economic growth.

 

[SpitfireV]

If they chose to change the government to a differnt state (democracy to socialist dictatorship or fascist state where they wwere involved in the policies of governing and social controls... they'd be terrorists - as they are, they are criminals who use some terrorist strategies to force their own economic growth.

Yes this is true but my point was, that gangs don't profit from the government as such, they profit from the legal system.

 

[Marauder06]

Yes this is true but my point was, that gangs don't profit from the government as such, they profit from the legal system.

The profit from the loopholes that the government allows to exist. With a change in government, all of the relationships they have built and TTPs they developed could be out the window. A more fundamentalist or conservative government could mean a crackdown on crime or could impact the the laws that they are already exploiting. The "what's in it for me" factor generally declines for criminal gangs when it comes to replacing the government, whereas for terrorists, overthrowing the government is often the goal.

 

[SpitfireV]

I don't think we're going to agree or come to a neutral space on this so I might just leave it there :)

 

[Marauder06]

I don't think we're going to agree or come to a neutral space on this so I might just leave it there :)

:) fair enough, what I posted was pretty much the extent of my knowledge on the topic anyway.