most ruthless terrorist organization

[tig3r]

the question: what do you think is the most ruthless terrorist organization?

the intention here is not to have this turn into a discussion about Al-Qaeda or the Iraq or Afganistan war, because we seem to have enough threads for those purposes. what i was interested in was gathering opinions on other terrorist organizations throughout the world that are very organized/efficient and ruthless in the battle with their enemy. besides the poll, any comments on the organizations above would be great. i just included the organizations that i could name off the top of my head so if you know any other large ones that i missed then feel free to comment on those as well...

 

[Kat Stevens]

The CIA... ;D

 

[tig3r]

good answer..missed that one 

 

[RecDiver]

PKK

 

[Jascar]

Al-Queda, simply because they've affected the world far more than any of the other groups, and in a short time. The other groups listed have a limited, regional focus while Al-Queda has become an ideology with a global reach.

 

[Island Ryhno]

Green peace  :-X

 

[paracowboy]

define "most ruthless".

 

[Infanteer]

This thread is the dumb equivlent of "Who's the most bad-ass commando unit?"  Perhaps you should better define the question, or else this will just get locked up for being a flame-war waiting to happen.

 

[Brad Sallows]

What's his name...that guy who used to make mountains of civilian skulls...

 

[Michael OLeary]

As far as Canadians are concerned, from the tone and content of some psts on the site, I have to say it's the Liberal Government, ..... except, that is, when the Conservatives are (were) in power.

 

[tig3r]

This thread is the dumb equivlent of "Who's the most bad-*** commando unit?"   Perhaps you should better define the question, or else this will just get locked up for being a flame-war waiting to happen.

i'm not familiar with the thread you are talking about, but i thought i made it quite clear the intention of this thread in my first post, and i mean no disrespect, but dictionary.com defines ruthless as:

ruthless: Having no compassion or pity; merciless, "a monster of remorseless cruelty"

and i dont see a flame-war waiting to happen, just give your opinion and move on...the only way some argument is going to start up is if there are some very strong supporters of some of these organizations posting on this site (which is possible)...but if you still want to close this thread just for the sake of it bothering you...then go right ahead...

 

[Michael OLeary]

Cool your jets tig3r, Infanteer's point is that the thread can have no meaningful conclusion. So what is one group or another gets more "votes", what does that achieve? A lot of work by the staff and regular users of Army.ca goes towards maintaining a credible site with rational discourse based on experience and fact. Opinions are fine when offered and identified as such, but a straw poll of this sort neither has a basis in readily recognizable purpose nor a reasonable expectation of leading to a sound and worthwhile debate or conclusion.

 

[Kat Stevens]

To be fair, neither did that nauseating "ALL CAPS THREAD",  or any of a dozen other mindless topics.  Some seek meaningful discourse, some seek brain numbing drivel...just MHO, as usual

Kat

 

[tig3r]

i agree with you fully, but the poll is just part of the thread, i again repeat...

"besides the poll, any comments on the organizations above would be great. i just included the organizations that i could name off the top of my head so if you know any other large ones that i missed then feel free to comment on those as well..."

i said this by meaning that others' experiences and fact could be gathered through their posts as it is done in other threads on this site, and many threads on this site are opinion orientated...unless I'm missing something here..please let me know if I am..

**i forgot to quote but that was in response to Michael O'Leary

 

[Michael OLeary]

To be fair, neither did that nauseating "ALL CAPS THREAD",  or any of a dozen other mindless topics.  Some seek meaningful discourse, some seek brain numbing drivel...just MHO, as usual

Kat

For which the Radio Chatter forum was created.

 

[paracowboy]

define "most ruthless".

what he said. In particular, in your opinion, define to us what makes one terrorist outfit "more ruthless" than another. They all seem pretty willing to commit atrocities in the name of greed.

This is like asking "What's more blue?"

 

[Kat Stevens]

agreed Michael. So, in the interest of avoiding yet another poo flinging episode, please put on your magic mod hat, and perform the necessary rituals to move the post.

 

[Michael OLeary]

agreed Michael. So, in the interest of avoiding yet another poo flinging episode, please put on your magic mod hat, and perform the necessary rituals to move the post.

Done. If the discourse reaches a level where a return to the Political Forum is warranted, then consideration of that move can be requested. For now, the focus on semantics and appropriateness can keep it in Radio Chatter.

 

[Zartan]

What's his name...that guy who used to make mountains of civilian skulls...

You're thinking of Tamer the Lame (what an awesome name, no?). He was from Samarkand, which is in modern day Uzbekistan, and is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. His real name was Timur (or Tamerlane), but he was wounded in battle, which "gimped" him, hence Tamer the Lame.

Back on Subject...
IRA= most persistant

 

[Kat Stevens]

I believe he was more likely referring to Pol Pot....just a guess on my part.