So this Tunisian who carried out this attack was a repressed individual who had been a victim of a drone attack?
Victims of drone attacks rarely survive.
Those that do are usually maimed in a way they cannot continue their lives as before. Ask any of the thousands of innocent civilians who have lost family members from this overt form of western terrorism.
In direct answer to your question; He was in an oppressed society.
Did you not pay any attention to the 'spring uprisings' across north Africa?
Did you not pay any attention to the information that came out about how much America finances the various regimes in the greater middle east?
Military Juntas are the preferred form of population subjugation and they are financed by American 'Aid'. 1.5 billion per year flows into Egyptian coffers in the form of 'aid. Even after a brutal military coup Obama's administration kept the 'aid' flowing in for 'stability' in the region. That means 'control' of the Suez and to hold back the potential rebellion of the subjugated population. Particularly as the general population in Egypt, much like the greater middle east, despise Israel, Americas biggest and key ally in the region. Stability in Egypt is so important for America that Egypt is the country that has received their second largest regular donations of 'Aid' since 1948, after Israel.
Go here ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...id-heres-what-it-does/?utm_term=.2d58875cc0a4
...to get a better understanding of how much 'aid' is spread through the area that supports corrupt governments and brutal regimes in the wider middle east.
The problem can be inundated with as much complication as you wish. Throw in the Sunni / Shi'ite religious factions. Throw in different countries flags. Throw in different cultures and languages...
The problem still remains simple at the core.
The middle east is oil rich and the control of trade in the Suez is vital to the easy flow of oil/money.
In order to control the the flow of money from the Persian Gulf (where the US 5th fleet is parked up in perpetuity since 1990, why do you think that is?)
A small portion of the money flow is redirected to provide 'Aid' and 'stability' to the countries that might cause 'issues' in the ongoing flow of money and potentially baulk the advancement of geo-political hegemony.
The suppression of the regional populations is what provides the 'ground' for the development of radicalism.
The ongoing atrocities against the civilian populations in the wider region makes the 'ground' fertile.
It is simple.
How about the 9/11 attackers?
Poor oppressed people from bleak back grounds or rich, comfortable well educated kids from good families? Osama Bin Laden? Poor downtrodden person or spoilt little rich boy? Also how many drone attacks were happening when 9/11 happened?
Osama bin Laden is well documented. Like Saddam Hussein and a trail of others, he started as a friend of the west... then he saw the bigger picture, and made his own unfortunate decisions.
It's not a simple problem, the whole of the middle east is a four way power play and to say all terrorism is because of X Y or Z is frankly daft.
Daft ... really...
Show me your complex problem then, and I will systematically break it down in a few short paragraphs.
Read a bit of Chomsky, very hard to argue against a brilliant mind like his when he puts the simple playing pieces into position.
Read Jared Diamond, another astute American writer, or his Israeli protege Yuval Harari, a sharp young mind writing out of a little town west of Jerusalem.
Perspectives arrived at by clarity of thought and historical fact.
The problem is fundamentally simple.
You can get lost in the tangled web of spurious media if you 'choose' to but the myriad of stories all lead back to the same scenario.
Oppression and subjugation of regional populations (for the exploitation of their mineral resources and geo-political hegemony) will create an environment rich for rebellion from said populations. Powerful military threat (US 5th fleet and Israel) and the use of 'Aid' (usually in the form of hard currency and military hardware) to maintain 'stability' are the necessary means by which 'control' of the mission will be maintained.
Here is a study case. In 1998 in between the 1st and second gulf wars Bill Clintons administration launched a 4 day 'terror attack' on Iraq.
A country that the US and NATO were not at war with.
It was before the use of drones, it was before 9/11, so the weapons of choice were Tomahawk Cruise missiles but conventional weapons were also used.
I quote...
"By 19 December, U.S. and British aircraft had struck 97 targets, and Secretary of Defense William Cohen claimed the operation was a success.
Supported by Secretary Cohen, as well as United States Central Command commander General Anthony C. Zinni and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry H. Shelton, President Bill Clinton declared "victory" in Operation Desert Fox. In total, the 70-hour campaign saw U.S. forces strike
85 percent of their targets, 75 percent of which were considered "highly effective" strikes. More than 600 sorties were flown by more than 300 combat and support aircraft, and 600 air dropped munitions were employed, including 90 air-launched cruise missiles and
325 Tomahawk land attack missiles (TLAM). Operation Desert Fox inflicted serious damage to Iraq's missile development program, although its effects on any WMD program were not clear. Nevertheless, Operation Desert Fox was the largest strike against Iraq since the early 1990s Persian Gulf War, until the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom."
So 15% of the strikes against the city of Baghdad missed. Where do you think those landed?
Among the population rich areas of city surrounding the targeted areas?
This is exactly how you anger a population. By indiscriminately murdering their families , relatives and friends.
This is how you create the fertile grounds for the radicalisation of young minds exactly like that of the Tunisian terrorist you mentioned.
The answer is staring us in the face.
If you want to stop terrorism, stop committing terrorism against militarily weaker nations.
Civilian casualties among our western populations from acts of 'terrorism, are considered to be acceptable collateral damage by the corporations that have the money to use effective lobbying groups.
Do you see where this is going?
The circle of violence continues well funded at the top level.
It's a simple problem when you examine it.
It's also more than a 4 way power play if you want to throw in more of the supporting countries, however, it doesn't matter how many ingredients you choose to bring into play, the problem remains simple.
