Evil Deeds

How about an objective view? After all this is a scientific site. Ultimate violence wins. There have been enough examples in the last three centuries. Maybe the chaps out east are just practising some western philosophy.
How do we know we are on the side of right? I sure as hell do not know all the facts.
To defeat an enemy you must fully understand his reasons and motives, however apparently farfetched and bizarre.
Why is the terrorist so many in numbers, so committed in ideology?
It is not enough to name call and label, examine, seek to understand.

From an unbelievably simplistic point of few, the chaps out east seem very put out, that a significant piece of their land was snatched away from them, the new occupiers were then armed to the teeth, with state of the art American weaponry. Then the new occupiers could do no wrong in the eyes of the USA

This article ultimately describes a major incorrect stereotype that is somehow ingrained in many minds of the American public. In order to fix this problem we need to put ourselves in their shoes, understand their truths, and see their perception on the world. Very few people actually view themselves as fanatics or anything else negative. It is very damaging to view yourself in a negative manner. Many statements in this article are true, like it is a last-ditch effort for their cause. However, the opinions based on that interpretation are merely one-sided. It is human nature for men to protect women and children. Those convicted of violent crimes against women and children are viewed as the scumbags of society, even in prison culture.

If someone points out a conflicting viewpoint from you, do you instantly want to hit them, blow up their house, and kill their children? Very few people do. First, most people argue. If that argument leads to a feeling of suppression, the suppressed party will try other methods of resolving the conflict, like seeking advice from a third party. If the suppressed party feels as if the third party supports their oppression, they may resort to violence. This violence gets progressively radical the longer they feel people are not listening to their side of the story.

If someone took your land without your consent, wouldn't you be mad? If someone flew planes over your neighborhood and accidently dropped a bomb on your neighbor's house, wouldn't you be mad? In their eyes, we have suppressed them and now are invading their homelands and killing their kids. They do not have the resources to fight us head on, just like we did not have the resources to fight the British in the Revolutionary War. The only difference is, the British were smart enough to give us our freedoms back before the guerrilla warfare turned into something worse- terrorism.

Ultimately this article takes facts and twists them to promote ignorance. This ignorance of other's viewpoints only escalates the problem.

Dear Dr.
In my opinion the psychological analysis of terrorists’ behavior you offer is a sketchy, generic, and somewhat empty and stereotyped analysis that disregards, as already pointed by previous readers, many important reality factors. Just to mention a few: economic, social, political and quite importantly, the role of religion. To force these realistic ‘motivations’ and the complexity of the terrorist behavior, into traditional and limited concepts of an insufficient psychology model, will not help the understanding of this serious problem and not will advance any concrete way to handle it.

It is admittedly difficult to do justice to this topic within the limitations of a one-thousand-or-so word blog posting. Your points are well-taken, and have merit regarding the psychological, religious and political motivation for radical Islamic terrorism against the United States. My point is not that terrrorists have no reason for what they are doing. Clearly, they have certain objective grievances, and in their own minds, have every reason to kill as many Americans as they can to try and make their point. But the fundamental question is whether you agree with their approach to resolving their problem. Certainly, demonization of the other is prevalent on both sides of this conflict. Violence is sometimes a necessary evil in life. You mention the American Revolution, and, then there is World War Two against the Third Reich. We may be headed for, or already in the throes of a Third World War between the West and Islam. The Nazis felt they had very good reasons and rationale for what they were doing. So ultimately, understanding the other side's psychology--conscious or unconscious--though crucial, can sometimes only go so far. At some point, we must take a stand and decide whether we support such violent behavior in the name of religion or not, whether we feel it is justifiable, or whether it stems, as in the case of Hitler's Nazi Germany, from the narcissistic desire for personal glory, honor, vengeance, rebellion, and world domination.

I do not support terrorist actions by any means, I just do not understand your logic on why terrorists do the things they do. You say that they have no reason for their actions but then in the next sentence you say "in their own minds, they have every reason to kill as many Americans as they can to try and make their point."

I understand their feeling for vengeance and personal glory. They fight for glory because what man does not feel glory when he fights for what he believes in? But I do not understand why you feel they fight because of rebellion and for world domination. If they are rebelling, who are they rebelling from? Islam ideology states, "Not one of you is a believer until you wish for others what you wish for yourself." I do not believe they are fighting any more for world domination than the US, or any other country for that matter.If they feel as though we offer peace and equality, I doubt they will continue their actions.

From your title, I understand your credentials are far superior than mine. If you wouldn't mind elaborating more on their rebellion and quest for world domination, I might be able to understand your logic on those issues.

Dear Dr. Diamond:
For sure I do not like violence, and I condemn terrorism. My commentary was basically a critic to a rather unhelpful psychological analysis. Pointing the need of reviewing ‘reality factors’ to get a better understanding of the situation, it does not mean to approve terrorist behavior. I fully agree with you, there is a limit to peaceful and reasonable handling of conflicts; and we very well might be facing a deep readjustment and definition of our culture. I strongly believe we need the clearest understanding of this increasingly dangerous situation to take a firm stand for our basic beliefs and values.

Sorry you both found my brief analysis "unhelpful." Just because you see me as "credentialed" doesn't mean you must agree with me or find my opinions valuable. Terrorism is a complex topic with psychological, sociological, political and religious determinants. A fellow blogger, Dr. Reiss, wrote a piece in response to mine you might find interesting. If you are interested in learning my views in more depth, you might check out my previous postings here on bin Laden, the Fort Hood massacre, and especially, on anger disorders and embitterment. You may also find my book, Anger, Madness, and the Daimonic helpful in clarifying my point of view on the genesis of violence and evil in general.

Best regards to you both,

"Terrorists are fanatics willing to both kill and die for their cause. That cause is radical Islam and jihad."

I'm very surprised to see such an absurdly oversimplified summary of events from a (supposedly) serious student of human behavior.

Is terror a label or an emotion? Both. Which one is real? To understand people, you have to understand the influences. If you are not considering the foul influence of propaganda and the wars it enables, you're missing most of the big picture. Why is the Right so irrational about war? Why is prejudice, hate, racism, and fear so common among the GOP? It's intentional. It's how they justify war. They want us to remember 9-11 so we can hate like they do. Who remembers Shock and Awe? Do their advocates of violence want them to remember, so they can hate too?

A good example of the terrorist mindset can be observed in the animal rights issue. People who consistently expose themselves to graphic images of horrific acts are emotionally flooded, and don't actually think, they just react. Find an animal rights group at a site like Care2, and read the responses to the stories they submit. It's not an eye for an eye, it's a thousand eyes for an eye. Now imagine being a doctor in the Middle East. What are they exposed to? I'm sure they understand the motivations of a one legged terrorist.

We wage war with planes and tanks against people who have none. We drop bombs from so far in the air that the plane is never seen. We have been the oppressor in someone else's land since the fall of the Ottoman empire, when the West divided up the Middle East. Does the American public know this? No, we were told that they hate us for our freedom.

On September 11, 2001 two planes crashed in New York and it blew up half of the Middle East. It's not an eye for an eye, it's a thousand eyes for an eye. Understanding terrorism requires that we recognize all of the terrors. Just remember, for some people, peace is a very bad day in the stock market.

I believe the author's viewpoint has significant merits. I also believe that there are numerous parallels between the activities and tactics of Osama bin Laden and these other religious fanatics, particularly in their effectivness of recruiting followers to perform destructive acts (either to themselves or others, or both) at their behest and on behalf of their "cause". I see this cause as being driven by the factors that the author is pointing out in this article.

There are dramatic differences between the missions of these factions and the history of radical islam is very long and deep, but one cannot overlook the similarities in the mission and the effectivness in recruitment, training and brainwashing of their followers.

There are a variety of reasons that the jihadists will cite for their cause, and some that may appear "just" to the intellectual public, however, the taking of one's life is an end to the follower's cause, in and of itself.

I believe the author's viewpoint has significant merits. I also believe that there are numerous parallels between the activities and tactics of Osama bin Laden and those of these other religious fanatics, particularly in their effectiveness of recruiting followers to perform destructive acts (either to themselves or others, or both) at their behest and on behalf of their "cause". I see this cause as being driven by the factors that the author is pointing out in this article.

There are dramatic differences between the missions of these factions and the history of radical islam is very long and deep, but one cannot overlook the similarities in the mission and the effectiveness in recruitment, training and brainwashing of their followers and ultimate futility of the mission in meeting the objectives of it.

There are a variety of reasons that the jihadists will cite for their cause, and some that may appear "just" to the intellectual public, however, the taking of one's life is an end to the follower's cause, in and of itself. These acts do, however, meet the needs of the central figures promoting the cause and accomplishes more destruction in their own name, satisfying the ego (messianic complex) of the leader.

OK, I am personally sick of hearing all of the news and reading headlines that have "Jihad" written all over them. Jihad is the way of struggling for the cause of God. For example, for a Muslim woman to wear the headscarf in a society that does not accept it or make fun of her for it is considered Jihad. Jihad IS NOT the act of causing a terrorist attack. The things terrorists do are not considered acts of Jihad, because actions like that are not even allowed in Islam. The only time Jihad becomes physical is if one is fighting in a war, such as the Ghazans when the Israelis occupied and killed them, causing a genocide, or something like Darfur.
So please, stop calling everyone Jihadists, because those terrorists don't know the first thing about Islam, one of the main meanings of Islam is "to spread peace." Stop making Muslims look so disgusting, they aren't. This article makes Islam and Muslims as a nation of people look bad, which is very unfair because that is so stereotypical to judge so many people from a group of people who choose to make pathetic mistakes and bewildering claims such as being terrorists and calling themselves Muslim-they would have never done things like this if they truly were Muslims.
From reading this article alone, I get the vibe that you are a Muslim hater, and reading anything else by you is not in my best interest.
You seem like a very smart psychologist, but I think you really need to upgrade your thoughts and knowledge.

Yes. You are right that "sometimes suicidal attempt to gain recognition, fame or glory for themselves."

Actually, I would say, it is to protect his or her DNA partially in the body of relatives. This way a clan or race can survive.
When one thinks that he or she is in a situation of absolutely no way to achieve the goal of life or to propagate his or her own offspring, he or she will gradually feel neither happy to live nor pain to die, just like a numb person.
Naturally, if the numb situation continues long enough, it will very probably lead to suicide without pain.

(More: "Happy Life, Depression and Suicide Are Managed by Instinct plus Wisdom"
http://www.articlesbase.com/mental-health-articles/happy-life-depression...)

"Clearly, they have certain objective grievances, and in their own minds, have every reason to kill as many Americans as they can to try and make their point... we may be headed in the throes of... West vs. Islam"

First, I think the title of the article is a misnomer. You lead the reader to think that you are speaking of terrorists in general and yet your article focuses on Muslim terrorists, radical Islam, and is along those lines.

Second, I have taken a quote from your response above and I am disappointed that there is an 'us vs them' mentality in it, where us is America and them is Islam. Ironically, that is exactly what the terrorists want. This isn't a conflict between Islam and the West. The issue has to do with ignorance, integration, and access to misconstrued versions of a belief system.

Please watch this brief video to understand how radicalisation occurs. There's also an article by Joe Navarro titled Unmasking the terrorist - Two critical characteristics. Both the two characteristics he writes about can be found in this video.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sharmeen_obaid_chinoy_inside_a_school_...