Why is there no one universally accepted definition of terrorism?

Question

a. Because every country practices terrorism

b. Because terrorism doesn’t exist in all countries

c. Because countries wish to support their own national interest

d. Because countries can’t agree on the levels of terrorism

Answer 1

There is: Terrorism is the targeting of unarmed civilians for politicial purposes in order to inflict fear (terror) into a population. It is criminal and it is a militant action. It is most notably seen in the form of explosives but could be a drive by shooting where that was not of purely criminal intent (ie. gangbangers)

Answer 2

That's a tough question because more then one answer would fit.

It could be A. because terrorism is relative
It couldn't be B. because there is at least some type of terrorism is all countries...and it wouldn't be a reason anyway.
It could be C. because what one person calls terrorism would be another countries act of national preservation or an act in national interest.
It could be D. because no one agrees on what constitutes as terrorism.

I don't know...sorry.

Answer 3

A definition is really just the generally-accepted meaning of a word. You could probably get a definition in broad terms that most people could agree on, like, "unwarranted lethal force against innocents for political or ideological reasons." But you would never get people to agree on which situations fit that definition. For instance, some would think that anyone not directly involved in military force was innocent; radicals might suggest that anyone who didn't agree with their ideology was not; and there are many degrees in between. And who would decide when action is "warranted"???

Such is the problem with the differences between us all.

Answer 4

It's all except B

So someone sets off a bomb in a crowded Israeli plaza. Fine, that's terrorism. A group flies planes into big important buildings full of average, normal people just trying to make a living. Yep, I'd consider that terrorism too.

Now suppose a boy dies in an American air strike that was targeting militants (or dare I say it, terrorists?). Is his father going to think his son died for the greater good, or is he going to think that maybe both sides practice terrorism to some degree?

Answer 5

Option E because there is a definition of terrorism.

Terrorism
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

This definition encompasses many groups that we typically do not think of as terrorist groups. Terrorists don't always have to use violence.

Religions around the world, particularly Christianity and Islam use their influence to scare and coerce people.

Answer 6

Because the use of the terrorism is a legal form of WITCH HUNT. Anyone can be label this term and it becomes a free for all.

Answer 7

terrorism is fear out of control .......natural fear has a balance to maintain ......the earth itself is evolving as we speak with a cellular makeup that is moving to some outcome as not yet known or understood........the cells compete against each other for sirvival on the planet .........this balance is disupted at times......an example would be russia wanting more babies to make them stronger and to give them survivability and a more balanced existence on the planet......the will to survive is everywhere......the fish of the sea,the birds of the air,the humans and all animals with the energy to want more.......in these energys there is also emotions to balance......fear controls some of these, as long as there is a faith and understanding of a sort things seem to go smoother.......now parts of the world seem to have calm cellular existance with balance but it keeps changing just as the planet rotates.......just as the invroment changes, so does the markets of the world.......religons of the world are than used to control people with fear to set a balanceof a sort but also creates winners and losers.......so agressive v. s. humble ......peace is the inviroment side of things and agressive is the market side of things......greed is want out of control.i would think.........the paradox of this using terror to over come terrorism just as using the germ of the desease to fight the desease.......please read the book '' the perverse economy''..........so the real answer to peace in the world is to fight for peace ,to instill peace in eachother.......calm promotes calm........set by example........and less is always more

Answer 8

e because people can't even agree on blue.