CDZ Is every violent individual or group a terrorist or terrorist organization?

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Xelor, Aug 23, 2017.

  1. Pogo
    Offline

    Pogo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Messages:
    77,756
    Thanks Received:
    12,354
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Carolinia Agresticia; the Forest Primeval
    Ratings:
    +36,532
    KKK have traditionally been anti-alcohol. You know that right?
     
  2. Mac1958
    Offline

    Mac1958 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    39,637
    Thanks Received:
    8,169
    Trophy Points:
    1,360
    Location:
    Independent Ave.
    Ratings:
    +30,824
    Okay, great, change that to "if the KKK manages to stay cogent long enough...."
    .
     
  3. Pogo
    Offline

    Pogo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Messages:
    77,756
    Thanks Received:
    12,354
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Carolinia Agresticia; the Forest Primeval
    Ratings:
    +36,532
    How is it a message, if we have to contrive it afterward?

    No I don't think that counts. In terrorism the message has to be obvious, not rationalized later on as "maybe they had this in mind". In other words if the bombers were never caught and we knew nothing about them, the message should have already been obvious. In other words a terrorists' message cannot be some kind of mystery nut to be cracked. That dilutes the whole purpose.

    Your abortion clinic example is spot-on. If an abortion terrorist wants to make a statement -- he doesn't set fire to the local 7-11.
     
  4. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,858
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    I get y'all's point about "sending a message," but who doesn't see a message in just about any act? It's not that I think the suggested definition is wrong, but rather that it's incomplete.

    The message of "do as we say, else..." is essentially the message of every kidnapper, most robbers, all extortionists/blackmailers, and others. I hardly would call most such offenders terrorists. I think to that end, an aspect that is missing from your idea is that the principal audience of the "or else" message has to be a nation state or head of state, or some specific state actor who can act or elicit action upon the demand.

    There is certainly more to it than just sending a violent "or else" message to a state actor, but what you two have suggested strikes me as a fine place to start. There has to be more to it, however, for were there not, the people who've tried -- diplomats, public policy, national security, legal and law enforcement, etc. experts -- to define the term would surely have done so and obtained near universal concurrence on the definition.
     
  5. Slash
    Offline

    Slash Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2017
    Messages:
    660
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    45
    Ratings:
    +247
    But if their belief is anti-American the 7-11 would work.

    Take 9/11 for example. It was two weeks later before we had even identified the hijackers as members of Al Qaeda. It was December before Al Qaeda even accepted responsibility and gave a reason why, when we were already in a war with them. But that was terrorism in my opinion even if we had to do all the work to connect the dots, and they didn't send a message with it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Slash
    Offline

    Slash Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2017
    Messages:
    660
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    45
    Ratings:
    +247
    I guess you could use the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as an example as well. The ONLY reason we found out the reasons, was we caught the bad guys, same as in the Boston Marathon Bombing.

    I don't think you need to put a calling card out for the political change you want. If that's the reason behind it, that's good enough.

    Or McVeigh and the OKC bombing. Had we not caught them, would we have ever known it was in response to Waco?
     
  7. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,858
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    I disagree. There is absolutely no relevant "but" to it.

    ISIS is not Al Qaeda (AQ). ISIS didn't move the goalposts; it defined it's own. The only way to arrive at the conclusion that goalposts were moved is to lump ISIS and AQ together.

    While ISIS and AQ have different goals, I maintain that the U.S. goalposts are in the same place for both: eliminate the groups and/or their ability to pose a threat to the citizens of the U.S. Unlike some people, I don't buy into the notion of allowing someone else define what be one's own goals to establish and achieve. I'm of that mind on both a personal and national level and every level in between.
     
  8. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,858
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    Death by a thousand cuts or a quick death one never had the chance to fear coming is still a death. I don't think one is better than the other. I certainly don't want to be the victim of either. Do you?
     
  9. fncceo
    Offline

    fncceo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    4,559
    Thanks Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +5,968
    Of course not! Violent groups are only terrorist if you don't agree with their politics.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,858
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    AQ and ISIS people are stupidly fanatical, but they are not abjectly stupid. I'm quite sure that the goal of 9/11 was not to "get the US to leave the middle mast." [sic] I think the goal of 9/11 was to show that AQ had the perseverance, will and means to inflict grievous harm on Americans and on American soil, to show that just as the US can hit Middle Eastern targets in their homelands, AQ can strike Americans at home too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page