English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Please don't quote from the FBI handbook, or the UN manual.
I would like to know what YOU think a 'terrorist' is.
If you want to, give examples of 'terrorists' or 'terrorist states'.

2006-08-13 07:50:41 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Please mention WHY you think he/she or they are 'terrorists'.

2006-08-13 07:53:38 · update #1

I like this quote from spanner (below)

"Terrorism is the war of the poor. War is the terrorism of the rich."

- Leon Uris, from book 'Trinity: A Novel of Ireland"

2006-08-13 08:08:14 · update #2

thefoOt. No, I don't think Bush is a terrorist. But he is a heartless idiot.

2006-08-13 08:11:28 · update #3

15 answers

Any country that kills innocent people is a terrorist country regardless whether the terrorists do their work out in the open or behind closed doors like the "stonecutters". It does not matter whether they kill "their own" or whether they kill other populations.

Too many countries qualify to be mentioned, including several in the Middle East and in North America. (How many countries are in North America?)

Are you Japanese? (name) The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were definitely terrorists' acts. Was the "War on Terror" started in 1945?

"Terrorism is the war of the poor. War is the terrorism of the rich."

- Leon Uris, from book 'Trinity: A Novel of Ireland"

2006-08-13 08:02:49 · answer #1 · answered by spanner 6 · 1 3

Anyone who uses violence to further an idea or movement, instead of the normal political channels.

The definition doesn't include:
The Washington snipers (they are just well know serial murders)


This definition would include:
Tim McVey (He had a cause...but I can't remember what)
The Black Panthers
The KKK
The 9/11 Crew

I'm guessing you're trying to get at if people think Bush is a terrorist. At first I thought my definition put him in the clear, however after I have thought about it he didn't use the UN, which would be the normal political channel for a "legal" invasion.

So I guess by my definition Bush is a terrorist, however I stipulate this by saying that I don't believe Bush is evil, just misguided.

2006-08-13 08:05:21 · answer #2 · answered by theFo0t 3 · 0 0

A terrorist is a person or group that will take the lives of non-combatants.They hide amongst the civilian population.Hammas murdered many school children in a pizza restaurant some time back.These were harmless children.They also will take there lives of their own without any reservation.In Iraq they have murdered people in Masques and at funerals.We seem to have terror groups in the ME and it's all about religion.They murder each other ,even though they are Muslims ,their beliefs are a little different.That would be like here in th US if two people of the same religion would murder one another because they believe in their faith a little different.

2006-08-13 08:10:05 · answer #3 · answered by pretzgolf 5 · 0 1

A terrorist is one who spreads terror. They use violence around civilians. Man is a terrorist. Not single groups. Not muslims. Terrorism has been used since the dawn of time. The CIA used terrorism against Cuba during the cold war. So my definition is Man. Man can never totally get along so must always use fear to get what they want. One mans terrorist is anothers hero.

2006-08-13 08:04:55 · answer #4 · answered by one glove 3 · 0 1

i think of the excellence to be made is between terrorist and guerrilla. Guerrilla conflict is how people who're out-numbered, out-moneyed, and out-geared up with the aid of the different factor might desire to combat. You ward off direct wrestle, which you will not be able to win, and as a replace, slip into camp, slit some throats, and disappear into the woods. it rather is useful. it rather is how the colonies defeated the British in the process the yank Revolution (the father of guerrilla conflict is unquestionably, Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox) and what the NVA did to the U. S. in Viet Nam. i think of the excellence between the two is whilst the violence spills over (intentionally) into civilian populations. once you do this, you're a terrorist.

2016-10-02 00:52:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. But we can all think of situations both past and present where some kind of peace agreement is reached only to find that one side then send in their unofficial army (terrorists?) and claim it is nothing to do with the government. With these people it is nigh on impossible to make peace. Now tha's what I can terror!

2006-08-13 08:19:01 · answer #6 · answered by phoneypersona 5 · 0 0

To me, a terrorist is an individual who commits or threatens acts of violence against innocent civilians, in order to coerce a change of behavior, or to coerce a change in government policy.

You can of course have organizations composed of terrorists, but strictly speaking sovereign governments cannot also be terrorists, because they act in the name of the state.

I believe that when people speak of terrorist states, they're speaking of nations that condone terrorism, or give safe sanctuary to terrorists.

So for me, Osama bin Laden is a terrorist, but Saddam Hussein was not. (Saddam was a ruthless and sadistic Dictator.) Israel is not a terrorist state, but Lebanon is, because it has condoned the presence of an armed Hezbollah militia within it's borders. Hezbollah is not a terrorist state, but it is a terrorist organization.

No soldier in uniform, as defined by the third Geneva convention is a terrorist, but people who dress as civilians and conceal their weapons are considered spys and saboteurs under the Geneva Conventions, and are subject to battlefield execution, without a trial.

2006-08-13 08:14:34 · answer #7 · answered by Jay S 5 · 0 1

Terrorism is the systematic use or threatened use of violence to intimidate a population or government and thereby effect political, religious, or ideological change.[1][2] Terrorist attacks are designed to influence the broader society to which those killed, injured, or taken hostage belong. The dramatic focus of mass media is often ascribed as amplifying and broadcasting feelings of intense fear and anger that make terrorism more effective in the modern world. As a type of unconventional warfare, terrorism is designed to weaken or supplant existing political landscapes through capitulation or acquiescence as opposed to subversion or direct military action.

The term is also used pejoratively to assert that its violence targets "innocent civilians," or that it is immoral, wanton, unjustified, indiscriminate, or executed "with disregard for human life." According to some definitions of terrorism used by states and governments, terrorists are actors who do not belong to any recognized armed force, or who do not adhere to their rules, and who are therefore regarded as "rogue actors." Groups that call themselves separatists, revolutionaries, guerrillas and other specific terms are often referenced vaguely and pejoratively by their enemies as terrorists.

2006-08-13 07:57:51 · answer #8 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 0 1

Any person, group, or state that uses terror to further or achieve a certain goal is a terrorist to me. I guess that makes half the countries in the world terrorists.

2006-08-13 08:02:14 · answer #9 · answered by Ignorant_American 3 · 0 2

A terrorist is someone who attacks innocent people or targets. They don't wear a uniform to show that they are combatants and they cowardly walk among the civilian population until they set off their bomb or whatever killing device they have.

2006-08-13 07:57:59 · answer #10 · answered by karen wonderful 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers