If terrorism is defined as "bringing about political change through violent means", does that not make the US

Question

...the leading terrorist nation in the world for the numerous invasions and sedition of other countries, the latest being Iraq?

cool dogzilla. your definition, word for word, fits the US foreign policy like a glove.

"the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

More civilians than soldiers have died in ANY war the US has gotten involved in since WW2. All for the purpose of sustaining capitalism or oil greed.

The question still stands.

cool dogzilla. your definition, word for word, fits the US foreign policy like a glove.

"the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

More civilians than soldiers have died in ANY war the US has gotten involved in since WW2. All for the purpose of sustaining capitalism or oil greed.

The question still stands.

Answer 1

First, my soap box.....

I think what is most interesting about war (and terrorism) is how people (or nations, such as the U.S.) try to justify it. We have all sorts of "causes" - the religious cause (religious radicals from all religions), the economic security cause, the personal security cause, and then that dang freedom cause - just to name a few. And everyone thinks their cause is the most righteous. It makes me want to throw up everytime I hear Bush say, "We're spreading freedom." - HELLO!? Who decided it's our job to spread freedom (I don't remember ever voting on this issue)? And did it ever occur to Bush that not everyone wants the responsibilities associated with freedom? When enough people get fed up with their government, they'll eventually fix it themselves. Afterall, the most successful government takeovers happen as a result of civil revolutions, not from outside interference from other nations.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not just picking on Bush. I'm picking on anyone who believes that their cause is the only right cause and that everyone should be forced to conform to it and if they don't they should pay with their lives. That's just plain stupid.

Now to answer your question.....

Let's see. The definition of "terrorism" in my dictionary is: The systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. But by that definition, we're all terrorists. So, let's look up "terror". Terror: 1. A state of intense fear: fright, 2. One that inspires fear. Hmmm... (my parents inspired fear in me everytime I brought home a bad grade on my report card). That's a hard one because personally, Bush doesn't scare me one bit - he just pisses me off. I guess since I'm not very objective, I would have to say it depends on who you're asking - perhaps someone who is more affected by our foreign policy - like the citizens of North Korea, Iran, etc. They might think so.

Answer 2

The use of the definition provided would fit any nation on the planet whether it is liked by their population or not. Many nations practice the above methods to change their political structure or have done at some point in the past. Therefore it would surely be hipocritical of one nation to state that another is a terrorist state.

What should be asked is that if a person rules over others without those being ruled over being able to make changes should that person be challenged or given complete power?
Had the NAZI party been successful in achieving their goal of world dominationwhere would we be now?
Maybe we should decide for ourselves who are terrorists and who are not?

Answer 3

Sad fact is in all wars civilians are killed more often than soldiers.Terrorism is done without a nations backing, they are organizations separate and apart from any region. The only government they have is one of their own creating. Bush may be a miserable excuse for a leader, but no, hes not a terrorist. At least not until he himself straps on a suicide vest. And hes not about to do that.

Answer 4

If that was the definition, and its not.

this is the real definition

"the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear"

Answer 5

Numerous invasions? Saddam was a monster. In Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda and Taliban deserved to die for what they did. During the golf we kicked Saddam out of Kuwait for invasion. Vietnam we were asked by the South Vietnamese to help them fight off the North.
When have we invaded a country when it wasn't needed or asked of us?

And I think Doggzilla just made you look like an idiot.

"More civilians than soldiers have died in ANY war the US has gotten involved in since WW2. All for the purpose of sustaining capitalism or oil greed."

Funny, but that's not America's fault that Shiites and Sunnis want to kill each other off. Which they have been doing before America entered Iraq.

Not to mention America hasn't made any money or oil off of Iraq. So that statement is wrong.

Answer 6

In the act of terrorism, one has to attack society's needs/fetishes in order for their msg to be heard and understood. Example, the world trade centre is the symbol of the 21st centry, money, a huge fetish of today's society. The American's are rocking iraq by attacking their whole way of living. All their needs and wants are being put at risk. In this sense i believe that the Americans are fighting terrorism with terrorism

Answer 7

Yes revolution NOW. take to the streets sheeple.bring down the corrupt politicians, Thomas Jefferson said there should be a revolution every generation!lets do it folks!!, come on sheeple. get off your butts .are we going to let them kill half a million ennocent people because they wonted to?. its in there plans.they brought the towers down people. they are going to set off a nuke in a city and declare marshall law and draft you men and declare war on a country. its time for a peacefull revolution. take to the streets.NOW do you see anyone out there? NO. will you see any one on the streets . protesting? NO they are sheeple. forget about it.

Answer 8

Sure, the US is the leading terrorist in the world.
I can't remember one good role US had played in any political issue.
Specially when it's ruled by: That son of ... Bush!

Answer 9

Yes, Oui, Si, Evet, Areh, Naam

Answer 10

how dare you call our nation terrorist..thats just simple minded don't you know the government has our best interest in mind! comeon use your head, they are scaring us into feeble mindedness because if we arent afraid then we might think and hurt ourselves.