English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Various definitions of terrorism have included:
(1) Intimidation and murder of civilians to effect political change.
(2) War waged by illegal combatants.
The first would include acts done by the US government (and Hisroshima/Nagasaki), as well as what Israel does to Palestinians.
The second would include what are also called "freedom fighters" in many countries, including the american war of independence.
Both would include the Nicaraguan Contras who were armed and supported by the US government.

So what definition of terrorist would not include what the US and Israel do?

Please avoid the "Yes but what about...?" type of gut response and try to give a rational definition.

2007-07-05 00:33:43 · 5 answers · asked by Donncha Rua 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Let me give a more specific example. How do any of the definitions given here not include carpet bombing a civilian area from 30,000 feet? Not exactly an act of heroism, and definitely aimed to inspire terror and it would be a very naive person who didn't expect to kill lots of civilians that way.

I asked for rational definitions, that define clearly what terrorism is. If we can't do that, then there is no point in using the word, except as a schoolyard name-calling exercise.

2007-07-05 02:34:44 · update #1

I actually like George Bush's definition, which says terrorists TRY TO FORCE THEIR RELIGION, BELIEFS OR WAY OF LIFE ON ANOTHER PEOPLE.
Isn't western-style democracy a belief or way of life?

2007-07-05 02:41:22 · update #2

5 answers

Well according to what Bush said a year or so ago " A TERRORIST IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP, WHO TRY TO FORCE THEIR RELIGION, BELIEFS OR WAY OF LIFE ON ANOTHER PEOPLE".
But that can be made into a very broad spectrum, including what Bush is doing in Iraq, could be considered terrorism based on his own description.
It can also be construed that non-smokers would be considered terrorists, because they are forcing smokers to quit, because they don't approve of it.
So in all reality the definition of terrorism is based upon the person that you are talking to and what their personal beliefs and feelings are.

2007-07-05 01:57:44 · answer #1 · answered by marvinlhardy 1 · 2 0

You're definitions do NOT apply to the US, Israel, or the Nicaraguan Contras. We actaully WERE freedom fighters, because we were fighting FOR freedom, as the Contras were when Nicaragua was taken over by the communists, and aided communist wars throughout Central America. Japan started WW2 in Asia, and encouraged martyrdom among the people, so nuking Hiroshima & Nagasaki was justified. Israel simply defends itself against Palestinian terrorists which are backed by dictatorships seeking their elimination, so that justifies their actions. Fighting tyrants and terrorists does NOT make YOU a terrorist.

2007-07-05 00:48:03 · answer #2 · answered by ddey65 4 · 1 2

The world was formed by this type of behavior through out history. It began when the first cave man kicked the crap out of another to take food. the difference is how much a coward the Muslim terrorist is. Afraid to have his face shown, cut the head off an Innocent person then cry like a baby when his rights are violated. You are of such insignificance that you stink of cowardice yourself.

2007-07-05 00:43:03 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 3 1

A terrorist is anyone who uses threats of bodily harm , or uses violence to get what they want. This could be anyone like a lover , ex-lover , a friend or foe.

2007-07-05 00:41:02 · answer #4 · answered by milldoc 3 · 1 0

people who terrorise. instill fear into others to achieve their goals.

OR

people who are misleaded. belongs to a certain group called Al-Qaeda.

2007-07-05 00:57:41 · answer #5 · answered by cherica 2 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers