If you were a terrorist

Status
Not open for further replies.
Note i don't support these violence actions. The reason why i created this thread is in order to know possible terrorist targets and see what normal people and our governments can do to counter these threats. Also check my memorial day terrorist attack thread in the after 1900s forum. Anyway what would be you and terrorist comrades style of attack and where would you attack. List possible counters to these if possible please. People could get into a terrorist attack at anytime. That depends on location and timing. So maybe you could save your life if that ever happened.
 
It depends on what the terrorist is trying to achieve, and what the attitude to losses amongst the terrorists are, and what the attitude towards casualties amongst parties not involved are, and what sort of timescale they are operating on, and what sort of resources they have, and how much support they have among the local population, and how divided the local population is, and whether the terrorists are essentially internal or external, and how much support they have from external sources.

The Irgun behaved differently to the IRA, which behaved differently to the MNLA, which behaved differently to Al-Queda.

So you first need to define what the situation is. Terrorists who don't have clear, well-defined objectives will almost invariably fail to achieve anything other than a body count. If the terrorists have clear, well-defined objectives, and can present a plausible solution to addressing those grievances stand a much greater chance of achieving at least part of their aims.
 
"So, if hypothetically I had a pound or two of C4 and wanted to make a point, where would I put it?"

Joke aside, and in-before I get banned from ever taking a plane again, I always wondered why the fascination for the capitals.
Look at the recent attack in France. People felt rather safe being out of Paris cause bombing always happens in the capital. Then Nice, no one is safe.

Imagine a campaign of bombing or attacks in small towns, a couple villages. Really, you don't even need to attack anyone. Tag yor slogan in every little corner of the country, nail a dead animal to a Church door and people will get crazy. Just look at the clown psychosis in the States...
 
Making a point is not an objective. If you don't know what you're trying to achieve, it's highly unlikely you'll achieve it.
Often, making a point is the objective. It's very rare in Western Countries that terrorist attacks are to disable a specific aspect (nuclear central, army capability...). It's all about making a point.

Mostly, "none of you are safe". Or in recent days, "all Muslim are potential fighters" to destroy the "grey zone" as they call it. The destruction of that grey zone is a very common objective, mostly by seeking backlash and persecution.

Let's get another example:
Anarchist terrorists attack some a street, killing people. Government enforces coercitive measures on parties from the left, imprisons people and bears down on them with all its might. Anarchist sympathiser or people who believe in the idea without wanting a "Grand Soir" see that society won't accept their ideals and will actively hunt them down. The State IS the agressor and an authoritarian nightmare that should be destroyed. People who were not that deep in the movement now radicalise.

Now replace with Farcs, IRA, ETA, ISIS, etc...


So yeah, it's about making a point
 
Often, making a point is the objective. It's very rare in Western Countries that terrorist attacks are to disable a specific aspect (nuclear central, army capability...). It's all about making a point.

The IRA, for example, had a very clear objective. Unification of Ulster and Eire. It had a very clear strategy to achieve that objective; to make it too much trouble for Britain to retain control of Ulster. To achieve that end, they adopted a number of tactics, including phoned warnings (too many civilian casualties on mainland Britain could well cause a backlash; far better to get the same level of disruption by phoning in a warning so a place can be evacuated, minimising casualties and maximising disruption). They would use their resources in a certain way to achieve those goals. The IRA didn't make use of suicide bombers, which reduces the number of options for getting devices to where they wanted them.

The Irgun were basically operating in a situation where they wanted the British forces out of their territory, and casual placement of explosives would kill their own people. They would use resources in another way.

If the point is simply to get noticed, then that means that the resources would be used in another manner. The other question that needs to be asked is whether or not the objective is to target symbols, or people, or create economic disruption, or just go for sheer horror. Making a point is an inadequate brief.
 
Look, if I'm a terrorist, the first thing is, I'd prefer the term "freedom fighter." As most of them do. Second, I'd be as pragmatic as possible. There are a few factors in this - how much sympathy can I garner, how much damage can I do, how much security would I have to deal with, and how much exposure can I generate.

For these reasons, my targets will almost certainly be in the United States. The media will provide ample coverage, and depending on my targets, I could garner sympathy. I'm picturing really unsympathetic victims - the Ku Klux Klan comes to mind. Same with people convicted of really unpopular crimes, ones against, say, children. Also people like Westboro. No one too politically charged - basically I want the people who are upset at the acts not to give enough of a shit to do anything.

I also don't picture huge attacks or anything bigger than, say, the Pulse shooting - several coordinated ambush attacks would do the trick. If I wanted to stay anonymous and just make people afraid, I would time the attacks to appear random, possibly throwing in a more sympathetic group to throw off the scent a bit. If I wanted to make it clear that my group existed, I would maintain funding by limiting spending as much as possible and maintaining semi-legal businesses that definitely aren't linked to terrorist activities. And go after no one but assholes. Across economic, racial, social, occupational lines - if you're unsympathetic, you're on our list.

The most successful movements of any time are the ones that are pragmatic and don't get too bogged down in ideology and fanaticism. This is why China survives to this day - another Mao-esque ideologue and it would have been the USSR all over again.
 
If I wanted to stay anonymous and just make people afraid, I would time the attacks to appear random, possibly throwing in a more sympathetic group to throw off the scent a bit.

If you want to stay anonymous, make sure somebody else gets the blame. If, for example, a bunch of synagogues get targeted, who gets blamed? If a bunch of abortion clinics get targeted in Phase 2, who gets blamed? If in Phase 3, you target gay bars, who gets blamed? End result, lots of suspicion, in-fighting amongst the populace, and there's nothing to indicate that it's anything other than someone else doing your work for you.

Of course, by and large, such groups don't crave anonymity. It rather defeats achieving whatever their objective is if no-one knows who's doing it.
 
If you want to stay anonymous, make sure somebody else gets the blame. If, for example, a bunch of synagogues get targeted, who gets blamed? If a bunch of abortion clinics get targeted in Phase 2, who gets blamed? If in Phase 3, you target gay bars, who gets blamed? End result, lots of suspicion, in-fighting amongst the populace, and there's nothing to indicate that it's anything other than someone else doing your work for you.

Of course, by and large, such groups don't crave anonymity. It rather defeats achieving whatever their objective is if no-one knows who's doing it.

True, anonymity would accomplish little except to strike fear into the population, which would probably be effective at first. Over time, though, the identity of the group would have to be revealed unless it's somehow possible to accomplish the mission at hand while staying anonymous.
 
Ok, I'm going to approach your question from the opposite end. What would/could I do as director of civil defense to blunt the effectiveness of intelligent terrorist attacks intended to do massive damage, not just terrify.
#1, Purchase a large number of spare very high voltage transformers and store them securely. This one insulates you against the effects of everything from an EMP strike to a Carrington Event to a time on target attack on multiple transformers with the object of collapsing the power grid. With adequate spares the event goes from a real existential threat to a major nuisance.
#2, Rebuild over time the strategic grain reserve we had during the Cold War. Store it proportionately to population throughout the country. Make real plans (i.e. pushed all the way down to the local county/precinct level) for distribution of said reserves in the event of major disaster. This one greatly reduces the impact of major disasters and attacks. Hell it would probably take at least half the lethality out of ASB events like 'The Change'.
 
This question isn't exactly worded in the best way, but I appreciate what you are trying to do (I assume for a timeline? I hope :p). I'd recommend editing this to ask "what would be the most potentially devastating terror attack in the nation of XXX" if you are looking for help in developing a rather dramatic POD. Depends on what you have in mind.
 
If I had to use violence, I would be part of the militant environmentalist movement blowing up non-populated but environmentally damaging sites. That way, I won't kill anybody, just private property.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
Note i don't support these violence actions. The reason why i created this thread is in order to know possible terrorist targets and see what normal people and our governments can do to counter these threats. Also check my memorial day terrorist attack thread in the after 1900s forum. Anyway what would be you and terrorist comrades style of attack and where would you attack. List possible counters to these if possible please. People could get into a terrorist attack at anytime. That depends on location and timing. So maybe you could save your life if that ever happened.

What is the point of this thread? How many of these do you plan to make?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
MIGHT be okay as a Chat thread, stressing the word MIGHT.

Absolutely is NOT a post 1900 subject.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top