HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Decade of US 'War on Terr...

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:45 AM

Decade of US 'War on Terror' Yields More 'Terrorism'

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/12/04



After more than eleven years of the US waging wars abroad in the name of "fighting terrorism" a new report released Tuesday shows that the number of global terror attacks has dramatically increased during the post-9/11 era, not decreased.


The new Global Terrorism Index (GTI) found that while the US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere generated huge spikes in terrorist activity and civilian deaths in those countries, it is North America which has been most insulated from the growth in violence.

Produced by the Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) the GTI is the first index to rank countries on the impact of terrorism and analyses the associated economic and social dimensions. The index is based on data from the Global Terrorism Database, which is collected and collated by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), headquartered at the University of Maryland.

"After 9/11, terrorist activity fell back to pre-2000 levels until after the Iraq invasion, and has since escalated dramatically," Steve Killelea, founder and executive chairman of the Institute for Economics and Peace, told Reuters in an e-mail interview.

5 replies, 470 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Decade of US 'War on Terror' Yields More 'Terrorism' (Original post)
xchrom Dec 2012 OP
malaise Dec 2012 #1
Flying Dream Blues Dec 2012 #2
xchrom Dec 2012 #4
DreamGypsy Dec 2012 #3
Junkdrawer Dec 2012 #5

Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:13 AM

1. Same with the drugs

but hey some folks are getting rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:15 AM

2. No disrespect, but that should come as no surprise. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Dream Blues (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:18 AM

4. it's always good to have numbers and stats.

even the obvious should come with that stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:18 AM

3. The glaring fault with the study...

From the article:

The glaring fault of the study, which demands note, is that it employs a very narrow definition of the term "terrorism"a word that Glenn Greenwald says "simultaneously means nothing and justifies everything." Within the scope of GTI report, the term excludes the violence of state or government-based actors like the US armed forces or NATO's military regime.

As Reuters notes:

The researchers used the University of Maryland definition of "terrorism": "the threatened or actual use of illegal force and violence by a non-state actor to attain a political, economic, religious, or social goal through fear, coercion, or intimidation".

It did not include casualties from government-backed action such as aerial bombing or other killings.

Long a critique of the "global war on terrorism" is that the definition of the word "terrorism" is meant to connote violence perpetrated by less powerful, though committed, militant networks and not the politically motivated violence of powerful nations, such as the United States or others.



America is not the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:18 AM

5. Probably part of the plan....

The War on Terror was and is a desperate attempt to re-justify US Imperial war spending and deployments after the collapse of the USSR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread