Based on some of the information of the last post, one could surmise that bomb attacks are a robust part of some global or local struggles, especially in the 1990s.
Would the 2000s be worse? That will be saved for another article and analysis.
But as I had presented, there were some issues in South America where I lived (not bad compared to other countries not mentioned, like Colombia) , there was the ongoing conflicts in the Holy Land between Arabs and Israelis, there was a general hostility towards the United States, particularly from radical or militant jihadi Muslims, and there was the wild card US domestic bombers like Timothy McVeigh in our own country. Not to mention another wildcard, the Unabomber (Ted Kaczynski).
But the general trend of bombs that were closer to me (as opposed to violence in South or East Asia, or Northern Ireland or the Bosnian wars, where I was not involved very much), was a general militant Muslim antipathy toward the West.
This was manifested in a number of ways, including significant bombings of US military in Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, people going through Paris, France, would take their chances going by trash cans. I had a room mate named Jacob in Provo, Utah. This was after I had already graduated from college and I was seeing about a career in TV and film. He was not a student at the time, but he seemed a little shell shocked in life. He had spent a few years in Paris in the nineties and been directly affected by not one but two bombs, one exploding in a subway that killed those close by and the other outside where he was knocked off his bike. Either extremely lucky or not so much, depending on your point of view.
But different jihadi factions continued their bombing strategies, which then lead to Nairobi and Dar es Salaam embassies being bombed, which lead to President Bill Clinton launching a missile towards Osam bin Laden in Afghanistan, as well as a missile strike on Khartoum, Sudan, where it was suspected he was supported.
Al-Qaeda had become the new global enemy. But in the 90s, there was still a matter of public uncertainty if there was a number one enemy.
Turns out, there was. But that would have to wait for events of the first couple years of the 21st century.
But we can surmise that there was a knowledge of things that indicated as much. The drastic effect of these initial bombings, in Saudi Arabia, then in Africa, then...
Things got real. Or realer.
Bombs are for real. And human guided ones can be worse.
Blog it, EMC.
Would the 2000s be worse? That will be saved for another article and analysis.
But as I had presented, there were some issues in South America where I lived (not bad compared to other countries not mentioned, like Colombia) , there was the ongoing conflicts in the Holy Land between Arabs and Israelis, there was a general hostility towards the United States, particularly from radical or militant jihadi Muslims, and there was the wild card US domestic bombers like Timothy McVeigh in our own country. Not to mention another wildcard, the Unabomber (Ted Kaczynski).
But the general trend of bombs that were closer to me (as opposed to violence in South or East Asia, or Northern Ireland or the Bosnian wars, where I was not involved very much), was a general militant Muslim antipathy toward the West.
This was manifested in a number of ways, including significant bombings of US military in Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, people going through Paris, France, would take their chances going by trash cans. I had a room mate named Jacob in Provo, Utah. This was after I had already graduated from college and I was seeing about a career in TV and film. He was not a student at the time, but he seemed a little shell shocked in life. He had spent a few years in Paris in the nineties and been directly affected by not one but two bombs, one exploding in a subway that killed those close by and the other outside where he was knocked off his bike. Either extremely lucky or not so much, depending on your point of view.
But different jihadi factions continued their bombing strategies, which then lead to Nairobi and Dar es Salaam embassies being bombed, which lead to President Bill Clinton launching a missile towards Osam bin Laden in Afghanistan, as well as a missile strike on Khartoum, Sudan, where it was suspected he was supported.
Al-Qaeda had become the new global enemy. But in the 90s, there was still a matter of public uncertainty if there was a number one enemy.
Turns out, there was. But that would have to wait for events of the first couple years of the 21st century.
But we can surmise that there was a knowledge of things that indicated as much. The drastic effect of these initial bombings, in Saudi Arabia, then in Africa, then...
Things got real. Or realer.
Bombs are for real. And human guided ones can be worse.
Blog it, EMC.
No comments:
Post a Comment