Friday, 8 July 2005

Yesterday's terrorism provoked an interesting chain of thought. Actual terrorism generally doesn't normally produce any beneficial results for the terrorists. The IRA bombings hardened England's determination to stay in Northern Ireland and the attack on the World Trade Centre provoked America into invading Afghanistan, and so al Qaeda lost a friendly government.

It occurred to me that mishandling of the aftermath of a terrorist attack can actually help to sway people towards the terrorist's point of view.
Terrorist carries out terrorism and claims responsibility, victim government(s) clamp down on Terrorist's ethnic or religious group (i.e. house arrests, Guantanamo Bay), media fuels public suspicion of group. Terrorist's ethnic\religious group or feels discriminated against and some will become more sympathetic towards Terrorist, especially the easily influenced.

So other than cleaning up the human consequences and property damage, would the best course be for the government to carefully and tactfully find out who was responsible and take them to court in the public eye, exposing them as the deluded fools they are?