The general public has only a very fuzzy understanding of how terrorists work, and the operating methods of widely different types of groups with widely different goals are often mixed into discussions like this. That's what's happening here.seamusTX wrote:The people who plan terrorist attacks use bombs because bombs are impersonal. A bomber can kill people that he never sees. Once the trigger is set, the whole incident is over in a second.
Lone bombers and shooters can also be insane to the point they can barely function in society.
The scenario that I described would have to involve fairly intelligent, sane, disciplined people who can work as a team. That means they have some level of empathy. They may hate others on the basis of ideology and religion, but there is a crack that possibly could be exploited.
Stockholm syndrome can work both ways. Captors sometimes develop sympathy for their hostages. In a few cases, hostages have used this opportunity to escape or be freed.
Quite a few terrorist airplane hijackings have involved the release of women and children.
It's also possible that the captors in this scenario are totally amoral and suicidal, and will not negotiate.
In that case, what is the flaw in their plan? (I really don't know.)
- Jim
There is no direct correlation between intelligence and empathy. Sociopaths are often highly intelligent, and completely without empathy. They consider their own goals to be much more important than anyone else's and act accordingly. Religious fanatics are similar in action - they consider what they see as the mandate of their religion to be superior to the needs or wants of anyone else on the planet.
Stockholm syndrome may develop in incidents where there is extensive interaction between the hostage takers and the hostages. In today's terror incidents, that isn't allowed. Communication is only at the direct behest of the actors and limited to fulfilling the demands of the captors. Hostages are bound and usually blindfolded as well to help dehumanize them, remove any opportunity for resistance, and make Stockholm syndrome much less likely. The folks who plan these things are well aware of the dynamics involved, even if the actors (who do not need to be very intelligent, as the backgrounds of the cadre in Mumbai showed) are not. In cases where the victims are not killed outright, they are often killed later or held for years. I don't give the Stockholm syndrome a thought where terrorists are involved.
While airplane hijackings of the past by some groups (PLO etc.) did involve hostage releases, they were different than today's incidents involving Al Queda and related groups. Those hijackings were done with specific demands in mind - usually the release of imprisoned personnel. Seen any in the last 5 years? Those are a bygone era. Today's incidents by Al Queda and similar groups are not designed to make demands and achieve a limited goal like release of an imprisoned leader. They involve massive killing to make a point - see the OSAC Overview of the Mumbai attacks for the new paradigm - a small, well trained cadre of actors, merciless mass attacks, 500 dead or injured.
Immediate effective counterattack by armed people who are in the intended victim pool during the first few seconds of the encounter is the only opportunity I see to prevent these actors from accomplishing their goal of inflicting mass casualties to gain recognition and achieve political objectives such as crippling the economy through fear or destabilizing the relations between nations. It's no guarantee of survival, but it's the best chance you'll have unless you're lucky enough to be in the immediate vicinity of a viable escape route when the balloon goes up.
