O-Trap;1764067 wrote:My apologies if it sounded as though I was trying to take you to task. I assure you that I wasn't. As for Anonymous, I made a comparison, because I'm not actually sure they're shaking in their boots about anything whatsoever. My statement was to imply that Anonymous is a greater threat to their infrastructure as opposed to their lives, and while taking their lives would hurt, they seem to be willing to give their lives up for their cause, from which we can infer that they regard the cause a higher priority than their individual lives. That's all I meant to say by that. Anonymous is a bigger threat to the "bones" of their organization.
As for whether or not the leaders believe in their own cause, that's up for speculation, I suppose. I've not seen anything to suggest that the highest authorities either do or don't.
I get it what you are saying about Anonymous itself being a greater threat to their infrastructure and not their lives. Bombardment from the most powerful nations on the earth is a threat to both infrastructure and life. My point is the advent of anonymous given what they have faced to this point from these nations is not going to scare them. The statement I made about them not shitting their pants is just that simple.
I am not saying their leaders do not believe in the cause. Personally I believe they likely do. Just that they believe its more important for them to live than blow themselves up at this point in time. They see themselves as a greater value to the cause than the minions they deceive and those that should take pleasure in the spoils of the conquest they have led.
O-Trap;1764067 wrote:They are governing from a geographic location, sure. In theory, everyone has to be somewhere. However, even if they choose a locale, they aren't tied to it like someone who is drawing their identity from that location (a national, ie someone who regards themselves as an "American" or "Syrian" first). If push comes to shove, they can still get up and leave the land to whatever fate comes to it without any loss of identity, at least in comparison to where they already are. Unless they're identifying as nationals before they are identifying around an ideal, the land will always take a back seat, it would seem.
I agree these people are not nationalists. They are religious fanatics who are seizing geography in the region where they believe the final battle will occur and their false god will intervene to save them from the mighty armies of the infidels. The fact is at this point spoils of this geography they have captured does provide them with revenue and means to attack abroad. Unless a great army is raised to remove them from it or the infrastructure contained within the geography they is so completely decimated that only extremely primitive life and commerce can exist upon it these types of attacks will continue. Personally I think it will take the latter followed by the former.
