What's the difference between an army killing civillians and terrorists killing civillians?

Question

I've never really understood this. I mean I've heard the rhetoric about how good and benevolent the Allies are, and they're just trying to end terror, but this was the exact line that Hitler used at the beginning of World War 2.

You can't tell me that the excuse that they don't MEAN to kill children is acceptable. Armies, in all recent wars, have used cluster bombs, non-precision bombs and all manner of weaponry that have been aimed at Civillian buildings. That is terror. How is it different?

Answer 1

Oh, you obviously didn't listen to the news tonight.

Armies (like Israel) "kill" civilians.

Non-armies (like Hetzbola (sp?) "murder" people.

It's semantics. And it's propoganda.

Killing is killing. The victim remains dead.

Answer 2

Here is the deal an army killing civilians usually begins with a declaration of war that warns both the gov't and civilians that they will be attacked indiscriminately and if they follow the laws of war then they will avoid unnecessary civilian loss deemed by strategy. Terrorist do not follow the laws of war and have no legitimacy because they do not have a government that supports their actions legally and takes responsibility. Those are the difference. Hitler was not a terrorists against popular belief. He was an elected dictator practicing policy in his systematic genocide of Jews and conquest of Europe. Hitler committed the greatest crimes, but he did his killing by the book and that is why he was not a terrorist.

Answer 3

I have theory about intention based terrorism and outcomes based terrorism.

hezbolah mean to kill civillians, and this is evil and wrong. This is intention based terrorism.

The US/UK/Israeli armies do not deliberately target civillians (officially) which gives them the ability to claim to not be terrorists. but the outcomes of their attacks on the terrorists is that MORE civillians are killed by the UK/US/Isreali military (including afghanistan and Iraq) and there are more innocent dead.

in my mind, whoever kills the most civillians is the worst terrorist. Both kinds are evil, but the outcomes based terrorist is dishonest and creates more death, this fuels more terrorism.

Who has caused the most pain? Who has killed and maimed the most innocent people? The intention will be of little or no comfort to the victims. but the outcome is what people have to live with everyday.

Answer 4

Shortly after the war in Iraq escalated, our esteemed Secretary of Defense, DumbDon Rumsfeld, was asked at a press conference about the 'collateral damage' of war, especially the unfortunate killings of innocent civilians and children. Rumsfeld, ever the sensitive, compassionate guy, replied,
"STUFF HAPPENS".

Well, when terrorists strike to make a point about the avarice, arrogance and corruption of America, 'STUFF HAPPENS', too - and innocent Americans get killed.

Yes, we don't MEAN to kill innocents, they just seem to get in the way of war.

George Bush, Mr. born-again Christian, should be reading his Bible. I believe there's a commandment there that specifically states, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL". I don't recall there being a disclaimer that says, "Thou shalt not kill unless you're the President of the United States and you have a vendetta against Saddam Hussein and your boss, Dick Cheney, wants all that OIL that's swimming underneath Iraq's sand."
___________________________________________________
Check out the new blog: BUSHWACKER!
www.blogger.com
http://al-aback.blogspot.com
___________________________________________________

Murder's murder. Whether you're a crazed serial killer, a jealous wife, a Jew-hating Nazi, or the Commander-In-Chief of a national military.

And there is no excuse - no justification - for MURDER.

Surely Satan has reserved a special oil-soaked corner of Hell for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and members of the most evil, corrupt, cowardly U.S. Congress in history, where they spend their eternal damnation blaming each other for messing up our world.

While I fully support our troops, I vehemently oppose the war.
Still, there comes a time when even the most patriotic soldier must stand up to his Commander-In-Chief and say, 'Enough's enough. I will no longer kill, rape, or torture just so you can enrich your oil-lusting friends.'

Bush has killed 2,573 U.S. soldiers as of today, all because of a personal commitment to 'get even' with Saddam's humiliating his daddy during Desert Storm, and all because a few oil execs aren't satisfied with the billions and billions of dollars they've already made from oil profits.

May God have mercy on his black, oil-encrusted soul. -RKO-

Answer 5

When an army kills it is killing on behalf of the state. Terrorists kill to further their own ideology.

If you are referring specifically to the Israeli incursion into Lebanon, I believe that the Israeli army is not behaving as a state sponsored army should, by indiscriminately firing, without targeting terrorists they are acting outside the scope of acceptable behavior.

This is going to make middle east affairs worse for decades because they are teaching a whole new generation to hate Israel. And the true irony is that large percentage of those killed are Christians, demonstrating that Israel is more concerned with killing than with eliminating terrorists.

Answer 6

Military myself and there is sadly very little difference. Both are paid to do their job, both kill innocents, both have a goal for the fight. The only reason between the two is a very small one and the Army is supposedly doing it for a good reason where the terriorists are doing it for their own agenda usually to disrubt society. But killing is killing and it is very similiar.

Answer 7

that's impossible to furnish genuine figures yet Al Qaeda has killed many many greater cases the form killed by human beings!! Al Qaeda is completely Sunni yet that has no longer stopped them placing Sunni and shi'ite to killing one yet another and an mind-blowing form of hundreds of harmless human beings have been killed, particularly women and young ones. Al Qaeda has grow to be the ultimate anti Islamic terrorist team!!

Answer 8

Armies don't TARGET civilians unless it is to end a protracted war that will cost millions of lives, soldiers AND civilians (WWII)

Terrorists TARGET civilians INSTEAD of military targets in order to create fear and hopelessness. They do not have the strength to engage an army in conventional combat...

Answer 9

I think intentions are different. Terrorist kill with cruel in tension. When terrorists attack common people are "Soft Targets".

Army, first of all gets activated to respond to terrorist acts. Theoretically their intention is to get rid of evil power. Offcourse theory always does not go with practice. And in this operation (presumably) by mistake some people get killed by army. Recently by mistake army of one country has even killed army of other country, by mistake.

Answer 10

Armies try to avoid civilian casualties , but you can't always know who is in the target area .
Terrorists hide amongst the people and use civilian deaths for propaganda, while deliberately firing into civilian areas .

Answer 11

Let think about itl civillians are not killed purposely they are injured due to war. Terrorists purposely kill people.