Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Don't disagree with any of that but it's tangential to the point, ultimately. If multiple bombs were going off in England now in the same way they've been going off in India or Pakistan for a while now, regardless of who was setting them off, I'm sure a touring team would think twice about going there..The IRA wouldn't've dared touch Australian cricketers. It would've been beyond catastrophic for them to make enemies of anyone but the English.
The IRA threat isn't comparable to the current one. While they're every bit as wrong and i don't believe in making a moral distinction between any indiscriminate bombings, there was rationale to what they did (bad rationale, but still some semblance of logic). They had political goals and the bombings were part of an effort to achieve them. Islamic militants, as far as i can see, just want to cause death and destruction to Westerners on as big a scale as possible.
And there is definitely a rationale regarding terrorist attacks, even on as large a scale as 9/11. If the aim was to just kill as many people as possible, they could have waited an hour longer when the buildings would have had around 20 000 people in them or gone and landed a plane or two at India Point, a nuclear power plant around 24 miles from NYC for example. I am, however, struggling to see the specific point of the most recent attack, though.....
Last edited: