Do you think the 'terrorist' attacks are justified?

Question

I mean isn't the UK and USA at war with Iraq and Afganastan, how come it is okay for them to kill thousands of civilians every month, but when it happens in the West then suddenly it's a terrorist attack and everybody is up in arms about it. Personally I always thought a war had 2 sides, and although I don't agree with it at all I think the east are justified in their retalliation attacks on the west....what do you guys think?

Answer 1

I didnt think we was at war with Iraq or Afganastan.

I forgot the Afgan people where so happy under the Taliban
And the Iraq people under Saddam and his Chemical factories let us test them on our own people.

We are fighting a percentage of people in these countries whom we removed as they where nasty to there own countries and if there not attacking there own people there attacking us.
There is other Political reasons for the Iraq war but hey if it gets rid a bloke whom refused weapons inspectors gassed his own people including women and children.Missiled allied planes everyday before the war.And was warned about the invasion if he didnt behave.

These Terroist are against us because where in there country after booting them out but if there where nice kind giving folks to there country then theres an argument.

I

Answer 2

Just because a war has two sides does not make an attack justified. Were the Nazis justified to attack France just because they were at war? Naturally they would, but was it really justifed? They started the war. They were in it for power and glory and conquering. Most people would argue that this was not equivalent to justification. I think you can make a fair argument that the Iraqi War was not justified (but not the war in Afghanistan, which was a fair and direct retaliation for the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist attacks since then), but even that does not excuse an attack on civilians in Britain.

The fact that civilians have been killed is a bad excuse as well, for several reasons. First, "thousands of civilians are killed every month," but most of those thousands of civilians are NOT being killed by the UK or USA. They are being killed by terrorists and insurgents. Second, the civilians that HAVE been killed by the UK or USA, and you are right to point out that there have been some, were all killed by accident. We are not targeting civilians. Doesn't make it right that they die, but that is grossly different than purposely driving into a civilian airport and trying to kill innocent lives. You do realize that many of these people don't even support the wars, don't you? Why should they die?

I think you can make an argument that a war is not justified, but arguing in favor of terror acts is pretty weak. Any direct attack on civilian targets is cowardly, unethical, and serves to true purpose. Maybe, just maybe, you can argue that a "terrorist" attack on a military base or convoy is justified due to the war. But that would not truly be a terror attack. That is more of an act of war. In that case, it is a matter of whether or not their side in the war is justified. That is an argument more easily made for Iraq than for Afghanistan. Either way, terror attacks on civilians is still not justified.

Answer 3

No terrorist attack is justified if it is by the west or by the east or whatever you want to call it.
The answer from Sonfai81 is a bit out of line. First of all, a real Muslim will never agree to a terrorist attack neither should such a crime be committed in the name of Allah. the Islamic Religion is very peaceful and beautiful if any if you have the courage to try to understand it you will see what I'm talking about. Islam has nothing to do with extremists or terrorists.

Answer 4

Apart from the obvious "two wrongs don't make a right", the victims tend to be civilians who had no part in the decision of the UK/US to go to war. And yes, I realise there are innocent victims in Afghanistan and Iraq as a result of this war, but you risk losing your moral high-ground.
If you join in in the atrocities, you become complicit so the best weapon is always to raise awareness and use public-opinion to reverse bad decisions. Frustrating at times, but direct action of this sort is less usccessful

Answer 5

I think that the LAST thing any group that truly wanted the US and UK out of the Middle East would do is to escalate attacks on our soil. Just when the Western society was seriously doubting the validity of us being there, they attack us here. All they are doing is hardening the resolve because the Libs can't say that terrorism here is an empty threat.

So, my point is...Terrorism here OR there is not about the allegation that Middle Easterners are just "defending" themselves against invaders...It's about them wanting to expand their warped version of Islam.

Answer 6

Yes, I agree with your rationale. We are at war and so called terrorist attacks are the only weapons and means for those folks to respond. The folks in that regional do not have armored tanks and planes, so how do you expect them to fight back.

Also, there is a lot of propeganda in war where each side want to be in the RIGHT. The Bush administration has worked hard in the preception of this unjustified war with FoxNews as the propeganda machine. Not anything is wrong with the War, Bush and current administration policies with that station.

However, our people are staying firm on opinion. But, it is ashame that those voices must stand behind the weak Democrats.

Answer 7

It's the terrorists killing thousands of civilians every month, not the soldiers from the UK and USA. Maybe if the Muslims stop blowing each other up and hacking each others heads off, things would settle down. Being the "religion of peace" you'd think they might consider that a viable option, but it doesn't seem as though they really want to.

Answer 8

Neither party is justified. Both field young, ignorant, and vulnerable militants in order to carry out the orders of a few privilegled elites. Both carry out attacks on civilian centers in order to acheive military ends. Both use the airy language of 'a clash of civilizations' as a whitewash for sordid political motivations (imperialism vs. theocracy). Both rely heavily on the power of mass fear and panic in order to maintain their civilian support system. Terrorism (the use of fear to coerce a population), is always unjustified.

Answer 9

The terrorist attacks aren't about Iraq or Afghanistan. It's about Muslims believing they've been commanded to conquer the world by Allah. It's theology that's behind all this. Were we in Afghanistan or Iraq when they ploughed a couple of airliners into the world trade center? And no, it's never justified.

Answer 10

Have you ever actually had a conversation with a radical Muslim? Or listened to what they say?

Their objective is for the whole world to be living under Sharia law. It's that simple. They use terror tactics because they are bullies. I have respect for all religions, but personally I prefer not to be facing Mecca when I pray, and that's my right...!