Is there any difference between the type of terrorist attack outlined in the novel and the near-daily mass shootings in the United States?
Created: 01/14/20
Replies: 10
Join Date: 10/15/10
Posts: 3442
Join Date: 03/13/12
Posts: 548
The attack in the book was generated for some financial gain for a very few and financial harm to others. The near daily mass shootings in the United States sometimes involve someone who has had a recent change in finances, but not always. And often, if there is any change in the finances of the shooter, the discussion of that is speculation since the shooter is dead as well. As for the label of terrorism, playing the devil's advocate, when one country decides that an important person in another country is bad and sends in soldiers or drones or both to kill that person and in the process "takes out" some other people, those other people could be innocent children/ adults. Where does the revenge end since a bad person to one faction might be a patriot to another faction? American revolutionaries were patriots to other New World settlers but probably weren't considered patriots by the European nation that helped finance their settlement of North American. SPOILER ALERT FOR THE NEXT SENTENCE........... What might have happened if Kate had not experienced the moment of self loathing when she thinks she has killed a baby.
Join Date: 07/28/11
Posts: 436
Both are terrorist attacks. The reasons for the attack differ. A terrorist attack is a terrible thing with a horrible outcome no matter what the reason behind it.
Join Date: 03/03/12
Posts: 251
Join Date: 02/06/17
Posts: 438
I think one major difference between the terror attack in the book and random U.S. shootings, is that Mahmoud didn't immediately detonate his bomb or open the metal suitcase. The mere fact that he COULD was enough to generate terror throughout the city. There was time to search the cameras throughout the city- to study his route to Le Louvre. There was time to bring a tactical team in to surround him. There was time to for a sharpshooter to line up his shot (and have an identity crisis). There was time to plan on how to best minimize the damage Mahmoud could have caused.
The shootings in the U.S. are so random and happen so quickly there is often no other option than to kill the shooter just to prevent even more carnage. People often do not have time to clear out of the area- -the shooting and running are simultaneous.
A second difference is that in Mahmoud's case, his act was definitely considered terrorism, and he a terrorist- -by the police, by the news media, by the people throughout Paris. We seem to have a difficult time attaching those labels to mass shooter's and their actions in the U.S.
Join Date: 12/03/11
Posts: 276
I agree with ac strine and would add that the terrorist attack in the novel was meticulously planned, while some of the mass shootings in the US are spontaneously reactive to some perceived injustice, or are incompletely planned (shooter leaves him/herself no escape route, for example) or are the actions of a fanatic acting alone. Both mass shootings and organized terror attacks are, in my opinion, terrorism, though the media is loathe to label mass shootings that way.
Join Date: 10/13/14
Posts: 176
Join Date: 05/13/19
Posts: 52
Both are terrorist attacks. Different motives, but meant to terrorize and to hurt people. (spoiler alert)
The fact that no bombs go off in the story and that it is engineered to move markets does not negate the fact that there are people who are scared and terrorized.
Join Date: 04/07/12
Posts: 265
I agree with acstrine, above. The attack in the book was very well planned ahead but not ultimately carried out. Most mass shootings in the US are also planned ahead in terms of gaining access to the scene, getting weapons, etc and can be terrorist in nature or can be a response to a family situation, problem at work, etc. And a terrorist bomb as opposed to gun violence is whole different situation, with more far reaching impact.
Join Date: 10/14/11
Posts: 153
One source I looked up distinguishes between International & Domestic terrorism.
International: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations ( state-sponsored).
Domestic: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/ or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial or environmental nature.
I see this line blurred as I reflect over the acts of violent terrorism of recent years and in this book. There was suspense in the book but I never felt a sense of terror from the writing in The Paris Diversion.
Join Date: 01/25/20
Posts: 21
There wasn't really a terrorist attack in the book. They staged a terrorist attack to achieve their financial goals. The daily shootings in the U.S. are committed by disturbed or angry individuals. They are not financially motivated.
Reply
Please login to post a response.