Topic: The world economy and global systemic terrorism. - page 2. (Read 352 times)

    -   Of course, the number one thing that can help a country's struggling economy is to boost entrepreneurship, because through this, it can create jobs for the citizens of the country. Second, I think the most effective thing for the government to do is to invest in infrastructure.

Only infrastructure can be started with projects in transportation systems, bridges, and airports. And above all, reduce corruption in the government; the more corrupt officials there are, the faster the rise of a country's economy. Maybe in this way, there will be a change for sure in the economy of a country with economic problems.

Seriously? /s
And there is a guy here who posts all week long how the east is united in its fight against the west!
India and Pakistan can't stand each other
Vietnam and the Philippines see China as the biggest threat they have ever faced
and rather than being united they can't stop a moment from finding a way on how to backstab each other!

Everyone needs to take a chilling pill and do this:


This is what a border should look like!


Depends on what economy
If you're a terrorist state, it doesn't matter how much oil and resources you have you will end up dirt poor as nobody wants do deal with you and the ones that still do are just there to fleece you since they know you have no option left.
When you build drones instead of building homes and all you spread is hate, then poverty comes back and this is the outcome:

We have stopped killing ourselves for 80 years here in Western Europe this after being the bloodiest continent ever where if we do a genealogical tree I doubt you can pick a hundred guys whose ancestors haven't at one point killed raped buther or executed each other.
So you can end wars, all it takes is for the people themselves to want to end it, no dictator is sitting on his cloud and doing all the fighting, when you have a massacre in Africa or Asia it's not some leader or politicians doing all the killing, it's the soldiers, thousands so them who are simply killing each other.

I initially view terrorism as a cancer of the modern world. Both in terms of its effect on the "organism" of the world and the methods of fighting it. As practice shows, such "diseases" cannot be treated with soft methods, stretching for years and decades, and soft methods cannot be used. In what I agree - total "circumcision" to any resources. To begin with total access to such resources as money, weapons, influence, technical assistance, etc. - everything that gives strength to this disease. Then point but complete destruction of centers, then all "metastases", then move to the final stage - the destruction of the smallest cells.
But there is problem number 2, which I mentioned above - corruption on a global scale. There are many examples, from the heads of commissions in international organizations, to the leaders of countries who play a double game and take handouts from terrorists or their owners. For this purpose the world judicial system should be changed - proven financial or other interaction and without alternatives - life imprisonment, and seizure of ALL assets. If it led to the death of civilians - most likely the death penalty. The problem is that you can't play by gentlemen's rules with scum.

It reminded me of a book about a new world order, and war was almost something that had to happen to resolve a tension. The easiest way to control is the control of finance, energy, core technology,... competitive races in all different professions. Almost everyone wants to be the best, so conflicts arise. Conflict appears as a way to cause damage as well as reset. Looking back a bit at history in different regions, war inherently exists everywhere because of unresolved conflicts, especially in this era when we have inherited modern scientific technology incentives, as well as modern weapons and equipment to solve the problem.

Learn about the terrorist event that I think is shocking to the economy, source: The Macroeconomic Impacts of the 9/11 Attack: Evidence from Real-Time Forecasting

Aside from the impact it has on the economic system of a country, how about the effect it has on human life and their rights? (Rhetorical). Terrorism is bad for both human rights and the economy at large because it only causes harm and doesn't solve anything. It's not peaceful, but only chaos, hullabaloo, imbroglio, ruckus, rumpus, etc. It can even cause death and inflict injury on civilians, mostly innocent ones. Talking about terrorism, it has a very bad effect on both human life and the economy. Expensive properties, million-dollar assets, homes, and the lives of important people can all be destroyed, which can greatly drop the economic system of that country. Let's take, for example, those countries that are mostly dependent on their crude oil, and perhaps a terrorism incident begins to occur, and it gets so bad that 70% of all the oil wells and rigs get destroyed. I am yet wondering how economic growth can then be driven positively in that country; it will just turn bad.

It is a form of proxy war. Because just as a power chooses the ground on which it will wage its conflicts, it also chooses the fighters who will fight in its place, who must have a good degree of loyalty and professionalism as well.
Africa has become the most tense continent after discovering that it is an important resource, whether in minerals or otherwise. Almost all countries of the continent, or most of them, are experiencing internal conflicts that take various forms, and the great powers exploit these circumstances to impose their control, whether by direct intervention or by supporting proxies.

I realized a long time ago that in most wars or conflicts going on anywhere, people are benefiting from it. So if there are people who benefit from wars, they'll find a way to start one if they have the power.
I've learned that things are never as they seem. Most times when things happen we may not know the end game, but I always believe there is one.

In some parts of Africa, when oil is discovered in a certain region, that region goes into an internal conflict almost immediately. These conflicts are sponsored by unseen forces. They have an endgame, they know what they want to gain out of the conflict.

These terrorists and militant groups are sponsored by Countries, corporations, and individuals because they have something to gain from them. We might not always see it, but there is something they gain.

It's quite disheartening that such things happen. Humanity has been zeroed to nothing because of the need for power. It has been like this in the beginning. Which shows that civilization; Western or Eastern can't stop war. Instead it serves as the Nitro to it. Because, war and violence is a natural human behavior. Caused by needs and wants. These terrorist groups have deals with the government. Whenever the government oppose the deal, they begin to attack citizens. While the country is in chaos they seize the opportunity to destabilize her economy, by looting expensive treasures. So, if the country discover where their terrorist emerges from, they'll definitely hate on the society or country. They is no way everyone in Pakistan would be a terrorist. But, when the name is mention, in India, first thing that'll come in mind is terrorism. Thereby suffering the Pakistan government, not to gain any alignment from India. Like the numerous disadvantages you just mentioned. Just like few above comment said; that the groups are more enhanced financially, technologically, and intellectually than the government. It'll be difficult for the government to stop terrorism. Because investors of war, make lots of profits. Hence the industry keeps multiplying in wealth. Some terrorist groups has been around for centuries and have placed lots of congress men and top politicians to work on their behalf in every country. They have lots of connection in the military, politics, religion etc. They hire the best graduating students in special force schools even before the government does. You'd see that they're quite far ahead from the government. Most times it's like the terrorist control the government. Because a good government wouldn't want to waste her citizens, alongside resources in war. Some of them would ob large to the terms of the terrorists for peace sake. Talking about the importance of terrorism in the world economy. It's detrimental. They use the money generated to strike different peaceful nations. The weapon industry is managed by terrorists; investors of war. So that they'll earn more money. They supply the army and terrorists weapons. If a country is attack with bio weapons like a disease. The economy of the health centers would boost. Which the terrorist knows how to benefit profits through there. The whole profits go to the underground economy. It doesn't help anybody or citizens of a country. It kills!

But it's like a suicide mission, right? when they initiate war, this also means that they are gambling against their whole nation. This is too deep for the topic, and we might have different views on government but I can agree that the government will not care of its people in times of desperation.

If we come to think of it, there are terrorists group that have funds as huge as the government's fund to its military, from this angle we can determine that there is powerful people behind these terrorists group and it could be bigger than a government, could be multiple? I didn't know why there are government in the world who funds a terrorists group and fight them to look like a saviour.

This is what they have been doing for a long time. Major powers initiate war and join in the proxy war to dismantle the whole region, then emerge as saviors by offering their weapons and money. The arms business is getting bigger globally and all the major powers are responsible for this. All terrorist organizations have a connection and are funded by a country. You can say these are some private military organizations secretly operated by various governments around the world.

There is no arbitrary terrorism capable of affecting the levels of the economy in this way as in the examples cited by the OP. It is organized terrorism funded by countries and international lobbies that benefit from it.
I want us to differentiate in our analysis between individual terrorist incidents that are in the form of isolated activity by one individual or a small group, and international organizations that are described as terrorism by their enemies. The most common example of these organizations is ISIS, which suddenly appeared as an independent movement that obtains funding for equipment and fighters from sources that are still unknown to this day. This organization, which caused devastation in vast areas of Syria and Iraq, was operating according to tight regulatory frameworks, and some official authorities still refuse to classify it as a terrorist organization on the grounds that it shares the same ideology.

You have started a great topic, in my opinion, Terrorism has great impacts on the world or country-level economic confrontation. For example, we Pakistanis are not welcomed in India, even our cricket team hated to go there (not by us but by Indians, and not every Indian hated it, but most did). It does not mean that we are terrorists and did great harm to India, its because of some central authority, we call them (saviors of democracy  ) they managed to get some thugs (paid one) to change the environment of the country and change the emotions of one country's citizens against other.

Many wars, caused one to call other terrorists, like the Russian and Ukraine war, and the current Hamas and Israel war. They are calling each other the terrorists. Of course, those who support Hamas will call Israel terrorists and vice versa. Overall, I don't want to share my opinions here.

I will say to avoid terrorism at the country or global level, they should increase their intelligence level, and work on their agencies, and cooperation must be kept low because more cooperation from one agency can cause them more trouble from some bad actor working in some other agency of other country.

Before when I was young, it was just like a conspiracy that have been published on the web and as a curious guy that search for things like that before, I can't believe that it tends to be a real thing that there are countries or big people that are on the back of these terrorists being funded by them. The impact that we're talking here is huge, it stops the development from that country because no investor wants to get in and every modern development can't continue because the terrorists are there just to stop and destroy the infrastructures. And when we say infras, we're like talking about $1M to $1B per project that they intervene.

Eradicating them wholly. But it's probably not gonna happen because with whoever is/are behind the funding of these terrorists, they'll just rebuilt a new one and it's becoming a cycle that there's one terrorist group that asks for their own government and then there will be another one that feels jealous that they're not given what they're asking so the attack continues and it's a nonstop cycle and these economic struggles from those specific locations where these terrorists are visible will have hard time to recover or be freed and that means, that economic struggle that they will experience is likely to stay until they adapt like what's with Afghanistan today.

I agree that a certain similarity has existed since ancient times (from poisoned water in wells to Trojan horses, etc.), but in the modern world, especially in the last decade, there are signs that it is a SYSTEM, and a well-oiled one at that. And its actions are coordinated not by mental failures of a separate person in a separate country, but it is managed either by a group or a certain alliance, which has quite specific goals.

Plus terrorism generates a lot of corruption. "A good example" from the Gaza Strip: yesterday it was reported that the UN office deceives the whole world with its data indicating that there are 2.5 million inhabitants there, although in reality there are about 900 thousand. And there is no real crisis there, but huge food reserves and purposeful manipulation. At the same time, the UN keeps more than 13,000 "UN representatives" there for the money of the whole world, in comfortable financial conditions.
Corruption is no less evil than economic terrorism, especially if it is a global organization like the UN.

Terrorism and economic saboteurs have existed for so long but their effect has never grown much into the world's concern economically, this can't happen if it has not grown into a war. A few bombings here and there will not have major effects since it's one out of many infrastructures they are targetting, and will not even affect the country it targeted much, not to talk of the entire world. This is why there is security architecture everywhere to make it more difficult for them to reach more important infrastructures.

However, I love what the US and Western powers are doing to curtail the effect of terrorism to avoid majorly the destruction of lives and properties. They are often criticised but if not for their help in Africa and the Middle East, I'm sure that the situation would have been so terrible.

To give you an example, and to understand what we are talking about, here are a few events:

- Explosions of ammunition depots in the EU:
2011, EMCO in the Bulgarian village of Lovnidol
2012, a series of explosions went off at a warehouse near the Bulgarian town of Stralja
In 2014, a warehouse in Vrbetitsa was blown up
In 2015, more than 2,000 rockets and anti-tank grenades intended for export to Ukraine exploded in a warehouse in Iganovo, near the Bulgarian town of Sopot

- Illustrative termination of gas supplies to Germany. On August 19, 2022, Gazprom announced that it would completely halt gas supplies to Germany and other EU countries via Nord Stream for three days from August 31 to September 2 for "maintenance and preventive maintenance." This was the second complete shutdown of the pipeline in a month and a half, and this time it was unscheduled. Before that, from July 11 to July 21, repairs were carried out according to a previously published schedule.
Gazprom did stop pumping gas on August 31, 2022, but did not resume it on Friday, September 2, under the pretext of an oil leak.

Purpose: to show the global dependence of Germany (economy) on supplies from Gazprom, and to force certain political steps. As a result: on the eve of a new shutdown of Nord Stream, gas prices in the EU soared to the absolute maximum in the history of the industry, exceeding the previously unthinkable 340 euros per megawatt-hour or 3500 dollars per thousand cubic meters. By comparison, now, a year+ later, prices are about ten times lower at about 35 euros per MWh.

- The sabotage of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipelines was carried out on September 26, 2022.
The aim is to stop "officially" and without penalties, gas supplies to the EU, to create an energy crisis in the EU. Possible consequences - destabilization of the economy, social protests, probably a change of power to a more loyal to the final beneficiary of these sabotages.

- Preparation and provocation of a conflict in the Middle East, in the form of an attack on Israel by Hamas militants.
Goal: to draw the U.S. and part of NATO into a new war, and as a consequence of the confrontation - the nearest countries of the Middle East, which are key suppliers of oil to the world market, to provoke a sharp reduction in production / supply to the oil market, which will extremely negatively affect the entire world economy.
The second purpose is that knowing the commitment in support of Israel, by the U.S., it would lead to a drastic consumption of the defense budget, to the detriment of other aid programs, such as financial/technical assistance to Ukraine against a terrorist attack by Russia.

Here is a list of those events that I have studied, and of course it is directly related to the situation in my country.

If you take other events of similar nature (perhaps readers will add more information), in addition to human lives and destruction, they carry a huge burden on the economy. For example, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the U.S., only the payments of insurance companies amounted to 40 billion dollars. The total amount of direct and indirect losses in the U.S. amounted by some estimates to 3.3 trillion dollars (in 2011 prices).

Probably many people have noticed that recently, to manipulate markets, they have started to actively use not economic levers of influence, but... terrorism. terrorism. And not only economic, but also classical.
If we evaluate the situation on economic confrontation (restrictions, quotas, sanctions, ...) - we can assume the possible development of events, because this process is quite public, the reasons and goals are voiced.
In the case of terrorism - we do not know where, we do not know how, and we see a real destructive action, and not only of economic nature.
Terrorism becomes a tool for achieving goals, by loser/rogue countries.
And now we see consolidation of terrorists of all levels in the ECONOMIC destabilization all over the world, and maybe even see how the general picture begins to appear, where it is probably not scattered groups, but perhaps a real international structure, with a control center, centers of financing and supply.

The real question is: how much of an impact does terrorism in the modern world have on the economy?  The economy of countries and regions, as well as the global world economy?  And what are the ways of solving and preempting such methods of "economic struggle"?