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