Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
8. I don't get how fighting terrorism by behaving like terrorists is a good way to end terrorism
Sat Apr 27, 2013, 02:59 PM
Apr 2013

Last edited Sun Apr 28, 2013, 02:15 AM - Edit history (1)

So which came first:

The use of the double tap strategy by the US to target first responders or the use of the same tactic by other terrorists?
It may be easier to blame terrorists for the drive to create and use drones but then even by your own logic it is easy to blame such strikes for the drive that will create more people using terror to extract revenge for our drone tactics. Or do you believe it isn't a terrorist tactic when used against funny sounding brown people, their neighbors and even their children.


A 2007 report from the US department of homeland security christened the term "double tap" to refer to what it said was "a favorite tactic of Hamas: a device is set off, and when police and other first responders arrive, a second, larger device is set off to inflict more casualties and spread panic." Similarly, the US justice department has highlighted this tactic in its prosecutions of some of the nation's most notorious domestic terrorists. Eric Rudolph, convicted of bombing gay nightclubs and abortion clinics, was said to have "targeted federal agents by placing second bombs nearby set to detonate after police arrived to investigate the first explosion".

It has been documented that this terrorist tactic has been embraced by President Obama.

Obama has adopted the “double tap” tactic by using second drone attacks to kill the first responders to the first drone attacks. Funerals for the victims of the first drone attack have also been the target of second drone attacks. These second attacks have caused the deaths of between 282 and 535 civilians, and at least 60 children. An incomplete number because my notes reference a year old tally

How does terrorising and killing so many civilians and children not create more radicalised angry people that may seek vengeance through terrorism? Is it because one in 50 of the dead may be a terrorist if the intel and identification are all infallible and the parents children and relatives of the civilians killed will somehow be just fine with their losses because of that? (unlikely that the intel is that good so it is more likely one out of a much larger number)
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How to create more Terror...»Reply #8