geo, what you say about terrorists being simpletons is true. But behind those that carry out the attacks, believing they are making the sacrifice for somthing they truely believe in, are unknown layers of increasingly intelligent players, each with their own agendas, and each pulling the strings of the ones below them. For example, the Bali bombers themselves, truely beieve that the attack they carried out was a blow against the infidels. But if you consider the fallout in domestic Indonesian politics as a direct consequence of the attack it becomes clear that there was some big stakes being played for by people more intelligent and organised than those with closer connections to the actual attack. Trying to lump terorists into a one size fits all category can't be done. Whilst international links may be found, you must always look at the local aspect, and work out who is using who. Are the "international" terrorists using the local players as part of a global program, or are the local terrorists using the international connections for the money and expertise they are able to obtain. I know in Indonesia when you analyse a variety of attacks supposedly all the work of Al-Queda, each of them had a local dimension that separated them into a series of unrelated attacks in terms of what was achieved by them. It is hard to work out who is using who, but if you consider who was hurt the most, not physically, but politically, it's generally a good indication of who was really calling the shots. Putting together a timeline of political events often shows clearly how a well timed event can alter the outcome of something that at first seems unrelated.
