Is a war of choice,( preemptive war ) an act of terrorism?

Question

Does not every civilian death become the burden of the occupation, and responsibilty of the invaders?

Is my point, only understood outside American controlled news? Most international legal experts agree that Bush is guilty of war crimes, he has already has been indicted in Japan.

Answer 1

Last semester I wrote a paper on terrorism. I found that there was no consensus among political scientists on a common definition of terrorism. There were many definitions. "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
So you see, I can not answer this question.

Answer 2

Seems to me that preemptive war would qualify as an act of terror UNLESS there was an eminent threat. In the case of Iraq we know this was not true and we also know the Bush admin. knew that it was not true at the time......It was simultaneously an act of terror and of treason.

Preemptive violence of any kind is surely immoral.

Answer 3

it is like asking why could you hit someone who walked up & smacked you interior the face. That merely would not make experience. using rigidity is the only language that terrorists comprehend. in the event that they have been a civilized group, they does not thrive in third international international places & you may set down & consult with them over a chilly beer. regrettably, people who think of that is okay the decrease off heads & blow up homes all interior the call of religion, won't be able to be reasoned with like rational persons. Carter tried to be intense high quality to Iran as quickly as they stormed our embassy. The Iranians stored US voters & provider participants hostage & Carter left them there for over 4 hundred days!! The Iranians knew not something could ensue to them. In comes Ronald Reagan. The hostages have been realeased interior of hours of his inauguration because of the fact they knew Ron do not play that sport. I undergo in concepts whilst Momar Kadafi began performing up. Reagan gave him a rapid slap on the mouth with a bombing run. Yep, never had yet another situation with Mr. Momar back. Clinton tried to teach the terrorists love even although they bombed embassies & US interests around the globe. what share circumstances have been the weapons inpsector kicked out whilst Clinton did not something?!? are you able to have faith that a US army deliver became bombed & provider participants killed & Clinton did not do squat? i assume they concept it became alright to fly a pair of planes right into some homes in this country. nicely, Bush do not play that sport. what share died interior the WTC & you ask why we could discover somebody to slap a hair lip on? Now that is between McCain & Obama. Who do you think of the undesirable men choose in workplace? the guy who they be attentive to won't tolerate it or the super Appeaser? the only objective of the protection rigidity is to kill human beings & smash issues. whilst international family members fails or that is obtrusive that it will not artwork at the beginning, deliver interior the protection rigidity.

Answer 4

They are two different things entirely. Civilian casualties are a side effect of war. With terrorism they are usually the targets.

For those of you who believe that Bush is a terrorist and the U.S. is as well, your ignorance is killing this country from the inside, and only stregnthening the postions held by the true terrorists around the world.

Answer 5

Act of terrorism.

I think US is the biggest terrorist in the world.

Look at past;

Answer 6

Sometimes when you don't get along the one on top has to stay there. So I would say no. An example would be Israel taking out Iran's nuclear receptors. They've done it before. you have to protect yourself as no one else will. Always remember talk is cheap and history has proven this over and over again.

Answer 7

The similarities are hard to dismiss. It seems to be a matter of viewpoint.

*See first answer.

Answer 8

no 2 diffrent things...preemptive is a first strike..in general war is going to happen sooner or later so one country trys to get in the first blow to hopefully win...terrorism is a group of people using terror as a insturment of fear....

Answer 9

Bit of a stretch I think.

Answer 10

No. Not when America is doing it to protect itself.