what is the difference between those who blow themselves up and those who used advance weapons killing people?

Question

what is the different between those who blow themselves up killing innocent people? and those who used advance technology weapons shooting people and destory building and killing innocent people?

what is the definition of terrorism?

Answer 1

Please calrify your question.
Are you trying to JUSTIFY 9/11??????

Answer 2

Now, I can see that you are trying to ask what's the difference between the fanatics that strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves and others up and the people like us who use Advanced Technology for War.

For one thing, we don't go around killing innocent people in the name of Islam, trying to cause terror among civilians; which, incidentally, is what terrorism is.

For the second, we're actually not very happy with our having to police your lands where your people were killing other Muslims, but are forced to do this for the sake of your own people.

Don't take my word for it, go ask them.

Answer 3

NONE!!

If there was a "terrorist" in my neighbourhood, say at MacDonald's, as this is the epitomy of the "Church of Consumerism", lots of food but no food value, then I would not call the Military who would bomb the "neighbourhood" including me under the guise that "terrorists" hide behind the "innocent", ME!

Why we send in the Military to deal with "terrorism" rather than re-inforcing the Police is beyond me. The "truth" is always the first victim of war. We went into Iraq and Afganistan for the wrong reason, and we are staying for the wrong reason using the wrong tactics.

We who are "civilized" should come up with a 'civilized" way of dealing with "terrorism" much like we deal with "serial killers" and "Mass murderers". We don't bomb our own "neighbourhoods" we should not bomb anyone else's.

Wether it's "ideology" based terrorism or "state sanctionned" terrorism, the innocent are just as dead. We should take a different approach to war and to terrorism. The War on Terrorism is an oxymoron like: "Fornicating for virginity" and "fighting for peace". We have to "create" peace, not fight for it. One more "bully" in the fight does not decrease the "collateral" damage.

Terrorism is supposed to be defined as war against a "civilian population". That is what war has been for many "millenia". We bombed the populations of Japan and Germany in WW11. We did not aim at the "military" but tried to "soften" up the "population" so as to make them "rebel" against the "fascists". We used "fascistic tactics or 'state sanctionned" terrorism. Of course we won so it was OK for us but not for "them".

War is not the "answer" to peace but it does reduce the global Population. So one could say that it reduces the environmental stress on the Planet. There' s a better answer. We have the technology, we can do it.

The word is mightier that the sword! If Georges Bush was better at words, (logic, rhetoric, syntax etc..) then we might see the Muslims as "allies". But if the North American religious "right wing" was "logical", we would have a "different" President in the US and a different Prime Minister in Canada and we would be talking rather that "warring". The Towers would still be standing and we would have moved away from our need of "OIL", the reason for WAR. Our Christian "love thy neighbour" philosophy would have been put into practice rather than just giving it "lip service" as we stole their resources and insulted their "gods" and "intelligence".

They are not right, but neither are we. We who were the "liberal" society, should have known better. We still should. Let's use the INTERNET and INFORMATION to combat "fundamentalism" on all sides.


Cyril Borg, the Cyborg

Answer 4

If one attacks unarmed civilians in office buildings, schools, hospitals, etc., it's terrorism.

If someone uses technology to defend their way of life and unintentionally kill innocents, that's war.

What's the difference between someone throwing a grenade through your bedroom window, and you firing back at them?

Answer 5

I see no difference except murder is just murder even if sucide is the next of kin to it. Terriosm is someone that exercise hate in their heart against another for what ever reason and kills. Something sililar to a hate group that we have now days.

Answer 6

What a wonderful question.

A simmilar question is what is the difference between a suicide bomber who kills 15 or a bomb that kills 150 thousand.

Really, you put things in perspective. I've never thought of that.

kodus my friend.

Answer 7

How could this be, the land of the free, home of the brave?
Indigenous holocaust, and the home of the slaves
Corporate America, dancin' offbeat to the rhythm
You really think this country, never sponsored terrorism?

Answer 8

Suicide murderers blow themselves up in the name of a false god.

Advanced weapons systems are the only language understood by those that would oppress their own citizens.

(Funny... I don't remember hearing your complaints when Saddam Hussein used biological weapons (WMD) against his own countrymen. I'm not sure if that says something about him, or about you.)

Answer 9

Whats the difference between bacon and oranges?

Answer 10

No difference, though it takes more brainwashing to get someone to commit suicide than shoo a rocket.
There is no difference, that is why Osama is a terrorist even though he hides in a cave.

Answer 11

Those who blow themselves up die in the mix.

Those that target kill others and not themselves.

Here is Merriam-Webster's defination of terrorism.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/terrorism