War on Terrorism, What is Terrorism?

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Psychoblues, Aug 29, 2004.

  1. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    I've literally been all over the world. Have I seen or heard of potential acts of "Terrorrism" against the USA? Absolutely!!!!! Were they casual or were they serious? Were they justified or were they not? Bottom line, were they dangerous to me or were they not? Fortunately, most if not all were what we might refer to as bar room bullshit. But some credense must be given to their arguments. My suggestion is that we pay better attention to the details of our foreign relations. Understandably, as the Republicans often do, a reluctance to appreciate the opinions of others is a national deficit but is no excuse. WE, Americans, are not an island. But I'm only assuming that you can dig it.

    Psychoblues

    God Bless America
     
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    you think other countries would be willing to be more aware and sensitive to the special needs of America too?? I have a dream---------
     
  3. krisy
    Offline

    krisy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,919
    Thanks Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +112

    We don't deserve special needs. We are just here to bail everyone else out :rolleyes:

    Psycho- I don't think terrorism is ever justified.
     
  4. wade
    Online

    wade Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Certainly terrorism is justified against a totalitarian regime. It is the responsiblity of the people to fight such a regime in whatever manner is most effective.

    Lets say that Bush declared martial law, suspended the constitution, delcared himself president for life, and proceeded to turn the USA into a police state, and delcared himself president for life. The only response would be terrorism, as there is no way the people could fight back on the field of battle.

    Wade.
     
  5. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    This action would not be terrorism then, it would be either rebellion or revolution.

    Terrorism is defined as violence against a civilian population, NOT a government body.
     
  6. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    So, to put it another way, you're saying that if Pres. Bush acted as you describe, then I would be justified in shooting you and blowing up your neighbors. Have I got that right?

    P.S. Please send me your address. :poke:
     
  7. wade
    Online

    wade Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Well, no, but if it were necessary to blow me up in order to hurt the illegal regime then yes. Lets suppose I worked at an oil refinery, or a newspaper that supported them, or was in a bar frequented by stormtroopers... then yes.

    But terrorism is usually not directed toward your own countrymen. Lets say that the aformentioned regime then conquered Canada. Yes, then Canadians would be justified in blowing up any Americans they could reach - as it is our responsibility not to allow our government to become evil, and if it does we are responsible for its actions.

    Wade.
     
  8. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    I disagree. There is no justification for terrorism (in my opinion). I define terrorism as it has already been defined previously in this thread: an act of violence that specifically targets civilian populations. Rebellion and revolution are both legitimate in my view. That does not mean I side with rebels and revolutionaries... that would depend on the circumstance.
     
  9. wade
    Online

    wade Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree, within your own country, assuming it is homogenous. Now what about if it's not. Lets say the USA were to go totalitarian and started massive oppression of blacks and hispanics. Lets say they could not eat in restaruants, use public bathrooms, attend public schools or goto college, participate in the political process, and were commonly beaten and killed w/o consequence. Under such circumstances, terrorism against any and all whites would be justified, since all whites are benifiting from the policies. Restricting targets to military and government installations only would make it nearly impossible to achieve any level of success. It depends largely on what the goal is - in this case it would be to make the whites rethink their policies by making them pay a signficant price for them.

    What you are basically saying is that it is okay for the State to engage in terrorism, but never justified for the oppressed to respond in kind.

    Wade.
     
  10. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    First, under the circumstance you describe, I still say that terrorism is not justifiable. Blowing up civilians indiscriminately (whether or not they have anything to do with the oppression you describe) is still wrong in my opinion.

    Second, I never mentioned anything about "the State" one way or the other; I resent the fact that you are trying to put words in my mouth.

    Third, why do you believe that government and military targets only would eliminate possibilities of success?
     

Share This Page