Terrorism is criminal action that uses violence and threat of violence to create fear and terror, and utilizes that terror to advance a political agenda (or just demand money).
Or according to the dictionary: Terrorism is the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments.
Each government can define for its own purposes what constitutes terrorism, and who is a terrorist. The term is also used loosely by the media and private individuals, usually to reference any use of violence that they personally don't think is justified.
2006-07-31 15:07:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think that every nation or every power-yielding group will label terrorists their enemies as a demagogue's way to marshal public opinion to its side. For example, if terrorists are those who use tactics of terror (like killing civilians, bombing public places, etc.) to send a political message, or try to rattle, incapacitate or fatigue an occupying army to gain self-determination, independence or have its own way of governing themselves...then every freedom fighter is a terrorist, even our forefathers who fought for our independence were terrorists (even though they didn't kill civilians --according to the books). There's a problem with the label "terrorist" because it lumps together anyone who fights against the established order through violent means (whether civilians get killed or not is a separate, but nonetheless troubling issue).
The word "terrorist" is so loosely used these days (although it's not the first time -- Christians in Roman times were termed seditious; Muslims and other groups were persecuted at different times under similar labels) that it has lost its punch and muddled up the big picture.
If a terrorist is someone who fights what he thinks is injustice or an unfair system by violent means and kills civilians in the process...why are Hezbollah combatants termed terrorists and Israeli forces are not? They're basically doing the same thing; they're just on different sides of the fence.
On a side note, yes, we can and we should negotiate with terrorists. To negotiate doesn't mean we condone or tolerate their violent means of achieving their purposes. To negotiate means to bring two or more parties together to find a common ground, make concessions (yes, and making concessions doesn't mean to be unprincipled or unpatriotic). A good businessman negotiates and makes concessions after finding common ground all the time. Do we call him a bad businessman for that, if the results are beneficial?
2006-07-31 15:18:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the laws of different states, terrorism is a crime wherein a person or group of persons commit violence by using explosives and weapons to air their issues or demands instead of filing it in courts. In International Law, the United Nations defines the acts that constitute terrorism and the cases against terrorism is filed in the International Court of Justice.
2006-07-31 15:12:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Terrorism is in the eyes of the beholder.
Certain people believe arabs and liberals are terrorists
I like to believe that government and big-business are terrorist.
2006-07-31 15:09:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by payamazadi 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's now interpreted in an American ways. When the Palestinians want to liberate their own land, they are considered terrorists. But when Israel brutalised Qana, Americans call then liberators.
2006-07-31 15:17:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by pgmetassan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋