If it is based on this definition of terrorism then the US would be a terrorist. Who creates these definitions?
From a poster here at yahoo:
terrorist (noun)
a person who tries to frighten people or governments into doing what he/she wants by using or threatening violence
I don't know the original source
2007-05-26 19:32:38 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
by now it is already proved that us is terrorist state!
2007-05-30 16:07:34 · answer #1 · answered by sristi 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I sailed into the Persian Gulf on a US Navy ship long before Iran threatened its neighbors. I was there long after the Iran-Iraq War. The ship will still be there long after Akmahdinajad is rotting in the ground just below the Ayatollah. It is something we do to preserve the right of Free Passage for our ships and all of the ships of the world. if that is terrorism then you need a new dictionary.
it amazes me that so many people spend so much time sitting in fron t of their computers telling the world how much they hate America. One thing I have learned: People only hate you for your success. Notice none of these little whiners spend much time telling the world how good their crappy little countries are? Because they wish they didn't live there either.
2007-06-01 15:25:36 · answer #2 · answered by morgan j 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you think of a terrorist what comes to mind?
Well the first thing that comes to my mind is a person that is not fighting for a country nor one that wears a uniform. They also make a habit of killing civilians, blowing up civilian targets.
Our armed forces are in uniform and can be readily identified as combatants, and fight for our country as ordered by the commander-in-chief of our country. Our armed forces are limited by the rules of engagement.
We do not blow up civilian targets, nor do we target any civilians as the enemy.
We will always have a presence in the middle east as long as Iran will not give up it's ambition to become a nuclear power. He is being told in no uncertain terms the United Nations, and other civilized nations don't want another Hitler in the world and if no one else is willing to stop you the United States will and have the necessary forces to do so.
I hope this has been of some use to you, good luck.
"FIGHT ON"
2007-05-26 20:38:02 · answer #3 · answered by loanmasterone 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is not terrorism. The United States can move warships anywhere it wants to in the world in international waters. All the United States is doing in the Persian Gulf is exercising its right to free passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran positioned anit-ship missles along its coast, and since the early 1980's has repeatedly threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz and sink civilian oil tankers transiting the Persian Gulf. 20 % of the world's oil passes through the Strait. That would meet your definition of terrorism.
2007-05-27 02:51:29 · answer #4 · answered by BH6 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
North Korea has a great variety of communicate, and that's approximately it. Their training structures are adverse at maximum suitable. in the event that they target one in the direction of Hawaii, they'll probably hit Tahiti. they have not got the working technologies to mount a clever nuke atop a missile. they might fairly get one to pass off in a cave. With all that stated, they are growing to be a actual soreness interior the posterior. Obama isn't waiting to commit any materials, and, he shouldn't. we've extra effective than adequate technologies in South Korea to counter any action wanting an entire scale land invasion. you may desire to remember that the rhetoric comes from a puny little despot and not the human beings as an entire. particular, they have been brainwashed, yet it fairly isn't any reason to obliterate them.
2016-10-08 22:20:24 · answer #5 · answered by sander 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are many definitions to the word Terrorist.
Now the one the "Yahoo poster" chose meets the requirement for his/her propaganda.
They could have chosen :a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.
But then that wouldn't meet their requirement.
2007-05-26 20:15:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Every country has a zone that they consider thier "property".The US navy knows the distance of this zone and respects it.The US can navigate outdide this zone as can anyone.If there is a buildup of ships in the area in question,it is there for "just in case"something happens.The rules of engagement(fire if fired upon) is in full force.this is a safety valve in case some get trigger happy.If like you say,"you dont know the source",perhaps it is your own.
2007-06-01 06:16:01 · answer #7 · answered by spooky 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran is a dangerous country, its runs by Religious Islamic Fanatics believing in killing non-Muslims in exchange of
Paradise and 72 Virgins
They better not have nukes or else...
2007-06-02 03:34:24 · answer #8 · answered by Atlas 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What it comes down to is which side is using the definition (terrorist) doesn't it-certainly make you wonder.
2007-06-03 17:54:13 · answer #9 · answered by Joan J 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A show of force is what it is called and it is done to make tha country ( Iran in this case) think very hard on if it wants to continue on it's present course.
2007-05-26 22:43:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is considered Pre-staging. It isn't a threat. It is a fact.
Personally, I don't think we are getting our point across fast enough about fighting terrorism wherever it may live. I think we should just kill them all and let Allah sort them out.. But, that is just me.
2007-05-26 19:51:37 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋