dlowan wrote:Do you want us to comment on our votes, Craven? I voted 0 - 10, although I was not sure if you meant domestic acts as well as those related to the agenda of foreign countries.
Hmm, interesting distinction. I am asking for both but another interesting question si how people evaluate them side by side (in terms of probability).
steissd wrote:Terror may grow and may not.
Agreed, since we are dealing with such small samplings any activity represents a large change.
steissd wrote:Terror groups cannot be efficient without open or covert support of some governmental structures (pertaining to what is called rogue states).
There is no statistical basis for this claim. I'm interested in stats for now.
ehBeth wrote:In comparison to the number of deaths from drunk driving, preventable disease, spousal violence ... I don't think terrorism will be any sort of blip on the national death stats on U.S. soil. Especially not terrorism from outside the U.S.
That much is a given, but I doubt there will even be a blip.
steissd wrote:By the way, in the most terror-stroken country in the world, namely Israel, number of road accidents victims every year exceeds number of terror victims. Terror has more psychologic significance than the practical one: with proper functioning of security services managing to prevent disasters like 09/11, it is possible to live with terror. And when terror leaders realize futility of their efforts, intensity of terror gradually decreases.
That terror's effect is largely phycological is a central theme to this topic. BTW, I agree that when they see that it's futile they will stop but am reasonably certain that they will not come to see things that way.
fishin' wrote:Craven, not to be a pain here but would you define the use of the word "terrorism" in reference to your question here?
I ask only because the official US Government definition is so vague it's pretty much worthless.
Quote:Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
I could define it, but then this might turn out to be a discussion on said definition. In any case I'm more interested in seeing how the nuanced definitions alters your take on the probability.
e.g. "if operating under this definition..., if operating under that definition..."
CodeBorg wrote:Does terrorism include the IRS? How about when the mafia sells you "protection" under a very similar scheme?
Does it include constantly looking over your shoulder whenever you drive a car?
Does it include the anxious feeling you get, when you don't use the proper brand of car/food/clothing/toothpaste and you really want to fit in, or keep your job?
Does terrorism include the fear of being held in a rape-room, when you may be in jail only a few days? (Over 200,000 males are raped every year).
Does terrorism include the fear of being strip-searched when you board a plane, or get a speeding ticket?
Does terrorism include the fear of losing your entire life savings when a neighbor files a frivolous lawsuit against you?
Does terrorism include the fear of relatives in another country being invaded by the U.S., just because the U.S. is feeling scared of what might happen if they don't rule the world?
Does terrorism include hate-crimes (based on race, sex, religion, orientation, etc)? A straight friend of mine was killed for dressing and talking just a bit "gay".
No (for the purposes of this topic).