←back to thread

350 points tepidandroid | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.424s | source
Show context
gcatalfamo ◴[] No.21023650[source]
This is how you create terrorists. What do you think the children and friends feelings towards the US will be from now on? People get radicalized for much less than that.
replies(12): >>21023867 #>>21023882 #>>21024090 #>>21024098 #>>21024108 #>>21024127 #>>21024148 #>>21024258 #>>21024722 #>>21025214 #>>21025358 #>>21025914 #
oh_sigh ◴[] No.21024098[source]
I hear this a lot but is there any basis for this? Were any of the 9/11 attackers widowed/orphaned by the US? Or were they just whipped up in religious fervor and an abstract idea of a cultural war with the US?

And does it go the other way? Do you create violent anti-Islamists when Muslims commit terror attacks? Were the orphans of 9/11 more likely to sign up for the US military, or commit hate crimes against Muslims than their non-directly-affected peers?

replies(4): >>21024157 #>>21024227 #>>21024428 #>>21024548 #
TeMPOraL ◴[] No.21024548[source]
> And does it go the other way? Do you create violent anti-Islamists when Muslims commit terror attacks? Were the orphans of 9/11 more likely to sign up for the US military, or commit hate crimes against Muslims than their non-directly-affected peers?

Yes, of course it does. Hell, even on the recent 9/11 HN thread there were people who said they joined the military after the towers collapsed. It's only natural reaction when your nation gets attacked, and it works the same everywhere.

It's best to think of this as a single self-perpetuating process, with a strong feedback loop of hate and suffering inside. So the US bombs some Muslim countries, and eventually some group manages to pull off a 9/11 in retaliation. US reacts to this by utterly destroying several countries, and in reaction, ISIS is born. Which then US and others attempt to bomb out of existence. Rinse, lather, repeat. A kills B's people, B retaliates by killing A's people, A retaliates to retaliation by killing B's people, ...

replies(2): >>21024684 #>>21025229 #
1. oh_sigh ◴[] No.21025229[source]
I love how hn is all about logical discussion and data, but when the topic is emotional enough, now anecdotes count for something.

Considering America has concentrated a large number of bombs on Afghanistan, why are they underrepresented in terrorist bombing of American targets? Why didn't the US see a spate of attacks from Cambodia in the 70s?

These are all great stories that have been talked about. But unless there is some kind of supporting evidence, these are still just stories.

replies(1): >>21025641 #
2. TeMPOraL ◴[] No.21025641[source]
I don't know the answers to your questions, but they are good questions. Not inconsistent with the image of a feedback process I presented. As a supporting evidence, I can say that every single case of terrorism or genocide I recall from both news and history lessons always has the perpetrators retaliating for some perceived or real injustice that happened to them, or their forefathers, in the past. Circle of violence isn't a new concept.