http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060906213231AAYXVjh
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terror
"terror
[...]
4 : violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands"
2006-09-06 17:40:59 · 17 answers · asked by me 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
If someone is fighting a war locally, and uses a car bomb against the enemy, is that terrorist, or combat?
Terrorism is attacking civilians to cause terror, or attacking military forces when you are not actively engaged in war.
If there is a war going on, and your enemy is 100 yards away, is there any difference whether you shoot a gun, shoot a rocket, use a plane to drop a bomb, use a catapult to throw a bomb, or use a car bomb? No.
So, as with many things, it all depends on the situation and context.
{EDIT} Kudos to osto11 (below) who also explained the proper terms.
2006-09-06 17:46:55 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes they are considred terrorists acts. Thats why the other day some liberal on TV was screaming about how there where more than 450 terrorist attacks in the world in 2005. More than there has been in 10 years or something like that. What he failed to mention is that something like 425 of those attacks took place in Iraq.
2006-09-07 00:44:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A car bomber in Iraq is considered a terrorist because we live in America and they tend to blow up American Interests or unsettle society against American plans.
Now if you were Al Quida (Misspelled on purpose) you'd probably consider them effective tools for anarchy.
Don't get caught up in semantics. Anyone who loads up a car with explosives and leaves it to explode and blow up innocent children in a town square is a particularly nasty murderer. The point is to push people to rash actions and more voilence, vengence and murder, drive fear into their hearts, control them and/or dissolve their government. A part of gueralla warfare by those who know they'd die quick if they attacked the army out right.
I wish we never coined the term "Terrorist", I highly suspect its turned into a meritbadge for some and a point of fear for others. Its also a very useful excuse for our government to take away anyone's rights.
-Rob
2006-09-07 00:55:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Were there car bombers under Saddam - no.
Who benefits from the car bombings - one step closer to civil war.
2006-09-07 00:43:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, since Timothy McVay(sp) was considered a terrorist as well.
2006-09-07 00:43:13 · answer #5 · answered by afoatmeal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
technically yes, but, it depends upon who did the bombing. in the iraq war:
iraqi shia, iraqi sunni fight/killing each other, fighting iraqi govt, or US personel = insurgent
foreign born fighter in iraq fighting/killing iraqis, or US personel= terrorist
i didnt invent the terms, i am just reporting what the bush adm. is calling them.
2006-09-07 00:49:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If you have a towel on your head, they are patriots. I say level the entire FU(KING country. Finish up bring the troops home!
2006-09-07 00:45:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
According to G.W., they are Insurgents. Sectarian strikes against their own countrymen and women. All in all, they are all COWARDS.
2006-09-07 00:54:56 · answer #8 · answered by greg j. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes they are terrorists, they are our enemies in iraq. that is why the war is so difficult because we are unable to identify the enemy. it could be anyone
2006-09-07 00:47:46 · answer #9 · answered by THEBurgerKing 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really...it is just a misguided indiscretion of youth. They are simply misunderstood.
2006-09-07 00:42:39 · answer #10 · answered by An Unhappy Yahoo User 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋