Why doesn't the definition of terrorism apply to the Neo-Cons?

Question

The American Heritage Dictionary defines terrorism as "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons

Answer 1

It would aply to those neo-cons who actually fit the definition, since the definition doesn't specify any particular ideological or political goals. Why? Have neo-con suicide bombers been hitting malls in your area or something?


Or are you thinking of the campaign of shootings and bombings that was being directed against abortion doctors and clinics there for a while? Like the destruction of medical research facilities by whacky leftist animal rights activits, those could be classed as terrorism.

Answer 2

Dude, you can spin that any way you want it.

The key word here is "Unlawful". If you think anything we have done to retaliate against the Taliban in Afghanistan or to remove Saddam from power in Iraq is unlawful... than no proof of fact will change your opinion.

Answer 3

Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Two points.