6 ms·
How War in Syria Turned Ordinary Engineers Into Deadly Weapons Inventors
- enqk 13y agoWell since the word engineer originated to designate people who built machines of war, this is not terribly surprising. (Reference, most French language dictionaries) Such as: http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/ing%C3%A9nieur/43051 http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/ing%C3%A9nieur...
- zwtaylor 13y agoThis is no doubt interesting, but it's very obviously a PR piece written to subtly engender American support for arming Syrian Rebels. This chaotic conflict is making for very strange bedfellows of the United States and certain extremist groups. There was a nearly identical article in The Atlantic a few months back, Edward Bernays would be proud! http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/100461/ http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-th...
- eeky 13y agoCouldn't agree more. The Syrian rebels are a loosely associated group with several elements who are radical Islamist and Al Qaeda. This could have easily been titled "DIY Terrorism".
- pyre 13y agoBut is it really terrorism at this point? It's a civil war. Just because some groups that use terrorism to further their goals are participating doesn't make it any less of a war. If the residents of New York City rebelled, and managed to take control of 2/3rds of the city, that would be a civil war (or at least I would classify it as such), even if Al Qaeda showed up to participate.
- msandford 13y agoYeah but you don't get to classify it, those in power do. And it'd likely be classified as terrorism.
- quantumpotato_ 13y agoDoes the word "terrorism" have a solid definition, or is it "I'll know it when I see it"?
- grecy 13y agoMore like "I'll use the terrorism label when it's to my advantage"
- dragonwriter 13y ago> But is it really terrorism at this point? It's a civil war. Civil war distinguishes context of conflict independent of methods, terrorism distinguishes methods of conflict indepedent of context; they aren't mutually exclusive categories.
- chongli 13y agoBut is it really terrorism at this point? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. History is written by the victors. Language designed to engender support for one opinion or another; propaganda. That's all this crap is.
- darkarmani 13y ago> One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. History is written by the victors. So the Kurds in Northern Iraq that got gassed by Saddam were terrorists? The VC won in Vietnam. Were we the terrorists there? Chiang Kai-shek?
- chongli 13y agoI'm not espousing this opinion, it's an (admittedly cynical) commentary on the use of the word terrorist in the media.
- pessimizer 13y agoEqually inaccurately, though. Both "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" are marketing terms. "Rebel" is accurate since they're fighting the government; that's definitely a rebellion.
- footoverhand 13y agoAn easy way to determine if the US supports a group is to look at the language used to describe that group. Are they "freedom fighters" or "terrorists"? France is fighting "terrorists" in Mali, not "freedom fighters". The US supports the Syrian "rebels", not the Syrian "terrorists".
- grimtrigger 13y agoWho exactly is the US? The government? Democrats? Republicans? Journalists?
- jbooth 13y agoAll of those things. When they all agree on a terminology, the terminology can be said to be used by 'the US'.
- grimtrigger 13y agoThey don't all agree.
- darkarmani 13y ago> An easy way to determine if the US supports a group is to look at the language used to describe that group You mean like "ally" or "enemy?"
- narrator 13y agoThere was one about the Libyan rebels too! http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/06/diy-weapons-of-the-libyan-rebels/100086/ http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/06/diy-weapons-of-th...
- mladenkovacevic 13y agoHey if the formula works why change it.
- throwaway439 13y agoIs no one getting tired of these retarded, overly cynical conspiracy theories popping up on every non-tech thread?
- grimtrigger 13y agoI think its fine to say the piece is biased (even though you haven't given any evidence despite the fact that "its very obvious"). However, saying an article by the free press was written for a specific political purpose requires some backup. I could accuse you of trying to engender support against the rebels, but that would be a distraction that moves the conversation nowhere.
- neurostimulant 13y ago> He points to a stack of metal objects in the corner, shaped like old-fashioned fire-alarm bells. They are what are known in military parlance as victim-operated improvised explosive devices—or, in plain English, land mines. Uh, I hope they don't use those land mines. Years after the war end, those buried land mines would still killing people.