Does attack on military fort of invading enemy on its soil constitute act of terrorism?

Answer 1

Are we invading Yugoslavia, Jordan, or Turkey?

Answer 2

An attack on a military base probably isn't terrorism in the strict sense of the word, since a base is a military target. But terrorism isn't normally the main charge in cases like this. In fact, until 9/11 I don't think there was a law against terrorism per se in the US. But the underlying acts committed by terrorists - murder, kidnapping, arson, detonating bombs, hijacking, etc - of course are all illegal and always have been.

The alleged intent of the Fort Dix defendants was to commit murder and that is a more than sufficient basis for prosecution, regardless of hair splitting about the exact definition of terrorism.

Answer 3

The planned terrorist attack on Fort Dix was an act of terrorism.

The Ol' Hippie Jesus Freak
Grace and Peace
Peg

Answer 4

Not if:

1) You are a member of an organized military force
2) You wear a uniform or other distinctive marking visible at a distance
3) You are require to obey the orders of a commander who is responsible for your actions
4) You obey the Laws and Customs of War.

If you cannot meet those criteria - then you are basically a criminal or a terrorist.

Answer 5

It's a legal act, provided you follow all the other laws of war (carry arms openly, wear uniforms or distinctive insignia, etc.) If you do all that and you are captured, then you get POW status and have to be treated according to Geneva conventions.

If you wear civilian clothes, though, and sneak in with concealed arms, then you are an illegal combatant. If you are captured you can be tried or executed or tortured or whatever your capturer wants to do to you.

Answer 6

yes those people should all be executed