Terrorisim Attacks in Europe

[madd0ct0r]

Some cunts isnae trying.

[NecronLord]

Care to explain, link or give some sort of useful comment?

[Broomstick]

I'm thinking that there was a drop off when the Northern Ireland "Troubles" were resolved - the "Omagh, 28 killed" 1998 was the last gasp of that. I'm not as familiar with the Basque separatists/terrorists in Spain, but I'm guessing they account for a significant number of pre-2000 casualties in Spain. It's pretty clear, though, that in the 21st Century there are actually fewer terrorist caused fatalities, but when they do hit they cause a big bump - the multinational nature of the 2001 bar (WTC in NYC contributed to that), the Madrid, London, and Paris attacks were all from whackjob extremists like Al Qaeda and ISIL/Daaesh. The only exception with a high death count was in Norway by a whackjob Norwegian extremist.

I am still extremely puzzled by the four word comment at the bottom of the OP, though.

[Iroscato]

I think the point is that it nicely represents in visual format how grotesquely inflated the threat of terrorism is by the media. And how terrorism in Western Europe has overall declined hugely in recent years/decades.

[Broomstick]

Hmmm....

There IS a real terror threat. While the number of individual incidents has gone down the death toll per incident has gone up considerably.

I'll also note that security changed significantly after peaks on that chart. It was in the early 1970's that metal detectors were made standard at airports. After the Lockerbie Pam Am bombing additional security was added. While I hate "security theater" as much as anyone, I think real security measures have had some effectiveness. Certainly, I'd hate to see 1970's numbers of incidents combined with the per-incident killing power we see nowadays.

[K. A. Pital]

I think that there is something missing: no distinction between purely civilian casualties and law enforcement casualties.

The latter are generally considered valid targets when fighting a guerilla war, but civilians are not.

Perhaps a graph with purely civilian losses could be more informative, as even in 2000-2012, civilians were only 30-38% of chosen targets and therefore can't represent the entire volume of casualties.

[madd0ct0r]

Hmmm....

There IS a real terror threat. While the number of individual incidents has gone down the death toll per incident has gone up considerably.

I'll also note that security changed significantly after peaks on that chart. It was in the early 1970's that metal detectors were made standard at airports. After the Lockerbie Pam Am bombing additional security was added. While I hate "security theater" as much as anyone, I think real security measures have had some effectiveness. Certainly, I'd hate to see 1970's numbers of incidents combined with the per-incident killing power we see nowadays.

The vast vast bulk of the deaths in that graph is IRA and Provo, and main reason they declines was a switch away from bombs aimed at killing and bombs that were called into allow people to evacuate before the building was brought down. Planes and airports barely figured.

I'm not saying there is not a terrorist threat and I'm not saying that life during the troubles was normal. But for the UK and for much of Europe this ain't new. The panic and hysteria whipped up over whichever group we're supposed to be scared of now just feels silly

[EnterpriseSovereign]

As a UK citizen I'm disturbed to see how the majority of those pre-millennium casualties are British.

Were there no terror attacks in 1993?

[Elheru Aran]

As a UK citizen I'm disturbed to see how the majority of those pre-millennium casualties are British.

Were there no terror attacks in 1993?

Can't comment on 1993, but I suspect if you broke down 'British' by English, Irish and so forth, you'd see that the majority were Irish. I could be wrong about that and the IRA might have been better about targeting the Brits than I know, but yeah.

I am intrigued by the uptick around the turn of the 70s-80s in Spanish and Italian casualties. Indeed through the early 80s there really are a lot of Spanish getting killed, apparently. I assume this has to do with ETA and other Basque separatist movements? I suspect Italian casualties are largely from things like plane and cruise ship hijackings around the Mediterranean, I don't know anything about Italian politics at the time.

It's notable, I think, that you are seeing less small scale attacks, more single big incidents. That suggests that in practical terms it *is* getting harder for terrorists to do their thing, but when they do their thing, they have to take the time and effort to make a significant blow.

[Sgt_Artyom]

As a UK citizen I'm disturbed to see how the majority of those pre-millennium casualties are British.

Were there no terror attacks in 1993?

Can't comment on 1993, but I suspect if you broke down 'British' by English, Irish and so forth, you'd see that the majority were Irish. I could be wrong about that and the IRA might have been better about targeting the Brits than I know, but yeah.

I am intrigued by the uptick around the turn of the 70s-80s in Spanish and Italian casualties. Indeed through the early 80s there really are a lot of Spanish getting killed, apparently. I assume this has to do with ETA and other Basque separatist movements? I suspect Italian casualties are largely from things like plane and cruise ship hijackings around the Mediterranean, I don't know anything about Italian politics at the time.

It's notable, I think, that you are seeing less small scale attacks, more single big incidents. That suggests that in practical terms it *is* getting harder for terrorists to do their thing, but when they do their thing, they have to take the time and effort to make a significant blow.

As far as I was aware, Italy was dealing with what they called the "Years of Lead" from sometime in the late 1960's till around the early to mid 80's. Pretty much saw a huge increase in both far-left and far-right terrorism, attacks from regional seperatist groups and I think two mafia wars among other things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_Lead_%28Italy%29

Only Wikipedia but it'll help if you want a bit more info.

[jwl]

I think the main difference with IRA/UVF is that those guys were local, whilst ISIS and co. are foreign. Of course you're going to get bigger problems when their source is in your own country. You're more likely to get attacked by ISIS if you live in Iraq, you're more likely to get attacked by the Taliban if you live in Pakistan, you're more likely to get attacked by Al-Qaeda if you live in the middle east, and you're more likely to get attacked by the IRA if you live in Northern Ireland.