Can Terrorism ever be justified? What consitutes terrorism?

[montelatici]

Terrorism is a mindset. What do you do when you don't get what you want? Some people work harder, some people protest, some steal, some wage war. Some people - normally when there's no chance for their bullshit - choose the terror route.

I am sure that if the non-whites in South Africa had worked harder the Afrikaners would have ended Apartheid.

Apartheid shows terroristic desperation on the part of the minority government, but indeed, there were black terrorists, too. Most of the people involved responded through hard work, then some through protest. I should have also noted non-violent political means, too.

"we will have to reconsider our tactics. In my mind we are closing a chapter on this question of a non-violent policy." -

Nelson Mandela

See more at: uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) | South African History Online

South Africa makes a great case study regarding the justifiability and effect of crossing that line into terrorist campaigning.

Don't forget that the Sharpeville massacre preceded your quote, eliminating the legitimacy the Afrikaner govt, globally. The Poko and MK response did the same to Mandela and the ANC. Was any of that constructive to the resolution, or did it extend the whole issue some 30 years?

It is doubtful that the Apartheid regime would have capitulated without the violence. The South Africa had become remarkably self sufficient and without the fear of violence on the part of non-whites, the whites had a lifestyle that was, when you include the servants, etc., higher than that of Europeans and Americans.

 

[Programmer]

Terrorism is a mindset. What do you do when you don't get what you want? Some people work harder, some people protest, some steal, some wage war. Some people - normally when there's no chance for their bullshit - choose the terror route.

I am sure that if the non-whites in South Africa had worked harder the Afrikaners would have ended Apartheid.

Apartheid shows terroristic desperation on the part of the minority government, but indeed, there were black terrorists, too. Most of the people involved responded through hard work, then some through protest. I should have also noted non-violent political means, too.

"we will have to reconsider our tactics. In my mind we are closing a chapter on this question of a non-violent policy." -

Nelson Mandela

See more at: uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) | South African History Online

South Africa makes a great case study regarding the justifiability and effect of crossing that line into terrorist campaigning.

Don't forget that the Sharpeville massacre preceded your quote, eliminating the legitimacy the Afrikaner govt, globally. The Poko and MK response did the same to Mandela and the ANC. Was any of that constructive to the resolution, or did it extend the whole issue some 30 years?

It is doubtful that the Apartheid regime would have capitulated without the violence. The South Africa had become remarkably self sufficient and without the fear of violence on the part of non-whites, the whites had a lifestyle that was, when you include the servants, etc., higher than that of Europeans and Americans.

The most violent times in SA were 2 decades before the capitulation. How do you figure?

 

[montelatici]

I am sure that if the non-whites in South Africa had worked harder the Afrikaners would have ended Apartheid.

Apartheid shows terroristic desperation on the part of the minority government, but indeed, there were black terrorists, too. Most of the people involved responded through hard work, then some through protest. I should have also noted non-violent political means, too.

"we will have to reconsider our tactics. In my mind we are closing a chapter on this question of a non-violent policy." -

Nelson Mandela

See more at: uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) | South African History Online

South Africa makes a great case study regarding the justifiability and effect of crossing that line into terrorist campaigning.

Don't forget that the Sharpeville massacre preceded your quote, eliminating the legitimacy the Afrikaner govt, globally. The Poko and MK response did the same to Mandela and the ANC. Was any of that constructive to the resolution, or did it extend the whole issue some 30 years?

It is doubtful that the Apartheid regime would have capitulated without the violence. The South Africa had become remarkably self sufficient and without the fear of violence on the part of non-whites, the whites had a lifestyle that was, when you include the servants, etc., higher than that of Europeans and Americans.

The most violent times in SA were 2 decades before the capitulation. How do you figure?

You are mistaken. MK increased its activities and authorized attacks on "soft targets" in 1985. In fact, the Amanzimtoti shopping center bombing was on 23 December 1985. Magoo's Bar bombing in Durban was in June of 1986. The last bombing before the 1990 Pretoria Minute agreement, where the regime agreed to negotiate towards enfranchisement of the non-whites, was the First National Bank in KIng Williams town.

Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) operations report - The O'Malley Archives

 

[Coyote]

I have to disagree, the IRA's goal was a free and united Ireland away from England. The mainly targeted the British army, constabulary, institutions and economic targets, much as a regular army would. Were there civilian deaths? Of course but there is in any war or conflict

It's the tactics, not the motive. I thought they chose soft targets...maybe I'm wrong.

I see what differentiates terrorism from other types of warfare is tactics - the motive can be great, and the cause just but the tactics aren't. It's fuzzy though.

I'm reminded of another quote "sometimes the end justifies the means". In the early 90's the IRA conducted what was called the Warrington attacks, they were directed at economic targets, the first was detonated at a gas storage facility, the second at a mall type location, as much as I believe in what the IRA stood for the second Warrington bombing was wrong and done in poor judgement, it served no purpose other than to create fear and chaos. In my opinion the gas storage bombing was an economic target but the mall bombing was terrorism, it should have never happened

Interesting distinction - I didn't think about economic targets. I guess also, a key thing is whether human lives are endangered. For example there are eco-terrorists that attack property but not human lives.

On the other hand actions that destroy property or livelyhood can also have the effect of terrorizing people.

Indeed, destroying shelter, water and food sources are considered acts of genocide.There are crossovers between terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and genocide..

Terrorism is a bulldozer at my front door. ~ Palestinian poet

I wouldn't consider it genocide unless it was perpetrated whole scale to the population and it isn't. But there are definately overlaps and I would consider bulldozing homes terrorism because it's collective punishment of an innocent civilian population.

 

[Coyote]

Terrorism is a mindset. What do you do when you don't get what you want? Some people work harder, some people protest, some steal, some wage war. Some people - normally when there's no chance for their bullshit - choose the terror route.

Not sure I agree with that. In most cases, it's a tool of the powerless against the powerful or civilian forces against conventional military forces and has little to do with "working harder" or any of that.

Terrorism is when the line is crossed from attacking military targets to attacking civilian targets but the reasons - the causes remain the same. Even though a group may turn to terrorist tactics, it doesn't mean the cause isn't just but rather no cause can justify descent into terrorism.

Terrorism played a part in the following causes - would you consider it "bullshit"?
Revolutionary war
Indian wars
The founding of Israel (Irgun etc)
Ending of Aparthied in SA

 

[lawhat]

Hmm. I don't really consider vandalizing, or other such small time crimes to be acts of "terror." Those are simply ignorant bumpkins in most instances.

In order for it to be terrorism, it has to strike "terror" into your heart and that has to be the goal. Not some dumb bumpkin saying, "derrrr, I hate me some Muslims."

What about the gangs in the U.S. that would graffiti your name on a wall before you were to be murdered ? I would say that is pretty freakin terrifying


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Programmer]

Apartheid shows terroristic desperation on the part of the minority government, but indeed, there were black terrorists, too. Most of the people involved responded through hard work, then some through protest. I should have also noted non-violent political means, too.

"we will have to reconsider our tactics. In my mind we are closing a chapter on this question of a non-violent policy." -

Nelson Mandela

See more at: uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) | South African History Online

South Africa makes a great case study regarding the justifiability and effect of crossing that line into terrorist campaigning.

Don't forget that the Sharpeville massacre preceded your quote, eliminating the legitimacy the Afrikaner govt, globally. The Poko and MK response did the same to Mandela and the ANC. Was any of that constructive to the resolution, or did it extend the whole issue some 30 years?

It is doubtful that the Apartheid regime would have capitulated without the violence. The South Africa had become remarkably self sufficient and without the fear of violence on the part of non-whites, the whites had a lifestyle that was, when you include the servants, etc., higher than that of Europeans and Americans.

The most violent times in SA were 2 decades before the capitulation. How do you figure?

You are mistaken. MK increased its activities and authorized attacks on "soft targets" in 1985. In fact, the Amanzimtoti shopping center bombing was on 23 December 1985. Magoo's Bar bombing in Durban was in June of 1986. The last bombing before the 1990 Pretoria Minute agreement, where the regime agreed to negotiate towards enfranchisement of the non-whites, was the First National Bank in KIng Williams town.

Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) operations report - The O'Malley Archives

The state response to terrorism is normally to close access to the bargaining table in response. Is it that the violence specifically precipitated these agreements or was it the De Klerk reforms in general?

 

[Programmer]

Terrorism is a mindset. What do you do when you don't get what you want? Some people work harder, some people protest, some steal, some wage war. Some people - normally when there's no chance for their bullshit - choose the terror route.

Not sure I agree with that. In most cases, it's a tool of the powerless against the powerful or civilian forces against conventional military forces and has little to do with "working harder" or any of that.

Terrorism is when the line is crossed from attacking military targets to attacking civilian targets but the reasons - the causes remain the same. Even though a group may turn to terrorist tactics, it doesn't mean the cause isn't just but rather no cause can justify descent into terrorism.

Terrorism played a part in the following causes - would you consider it "bullshit"?
Revolutionary war
Indian wars
The founding of Israel (Irgun etc)
Ending of Aparthied in SA

My take is that terrorism is fairly ineffective. In most cases, it serves to harm the movement that it's meant to support. Playing a part in history is different than driving it. In most cases of terrorism there's this need for publicizing the cause as though for support. Does it ever bring actual support?

 

[Coyote]

Terrorism is a mindset. What do you do when you don't get what you want? Some people work harder, some people protest, some steal, some wage war. Some people - normally when there's no chance for their bullshit - choose the terror route.

Not sure I agree with that. In most cases, it's a tool of the powerless against the powerful or civilian forces against conventional military forces and has little to do with "working harder" or any of that.

Terrorism is when the line is crossed from attacking military targets to attacking civilian targets but the reasons - the causes remain the same. Even though a group may turn to terrorist tactics, it doesn't mean the cause isn't just but rather no cause can justify descent into terrorism.

Terrorism played a part in the following causes - would you consider it "bullshit"?
Revolutionary war
Indian wars
The founding of Israel (Irgun etc)
Ending of Aparthied in SA

My take is that terrorism is fairly ineffective. In most cases, it serves to harm the movement that it's meant to support. Playing a part in history is different than driving it. In most cases of terrorism there's this need for publicizing the cause as though for support. Does it ever bring actual support?

I don't know...would aparthied have ended without terrorism? (I don't have an answer)

 

[Coyote]

Hmm. I don't really consider vandalizing, or other such small time crimes to be acts of "terror." Those are simply ignorant bumpkins in most instances.

In order for it to be terrorism, it has to strike "terror" into your heart and that has to be the goal. Not some dumb bumpkin saying, "derrrr, I hate me some Muslims."

What about the gangs in the U.S. that would graffiti your name on a wall before you were to be murdered ? I would say that is pretty freakin terrifying


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's terrifying but that wouldn't be terrorism - terrorism is done for a political or ideological, or some other cause - to force the opposition to concede.

 

[Challenger]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

 

[koshergrl]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

 

[Challenger]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Yes it is.

For example, the Nazis called European resistance movements against them "terrorists" as well as the Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising of 1943.

 

[Humanity]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Isn't that what he just said?

 

[koshergrl]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Isn't that what he just said?

Nope. He said it IS a matter of perspective. There's no perspective to the intentional targeting of innocents. You either do it, or you don't. If you do, you're a terrorist.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Isn't that what he just said?

Nope. He said it IS a matter of perspective. There's no perspective to the intentional targeting of innocents. You either do it, or you don't. If you do, you're a terrorist.

That narrows it down to everybody.

 

[Challenger]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Isn't that what he just said?

Nope. He said it IS a matter of perspective. There's no perspective to the intentional targeting of innocents. You either do it, or you don't. If you do, you're a terrorist.

Zionist Israel makes so much about using precision weapons to avoid civilian casualties, if they can do this,



then this is intentional targeting of innocents

 

[Hollie]

I'

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

In every case, I'd have to answer "Yes" to all and "No" to all options mentioned. It's a matter of perspective; the old cliché, “one person’s “terrorist” is another person’s “freedom fighter” applies when looking at each example.

No, it's not a matter of perspective.

Isn't that what he just said?

Nope. He said it IS a matter of perspective. There's no perspective to the intentional targeting of innocents. You either do it, or you don't. If you do, you're a terrorist.

Zionist Israel makes so much about using precision weapons to avoid civilian casualties, if they can do this,



then this is intentional targeting of innocents

Some Islamic terrorist rats nests are bigger than others.

The right tool for the right job.

 

[ChrisL]

If you are intentionally targeting innocent civilians, that is just one thing that would make it terrorism to me. In a war, collateral damage is to be expected, and civilians are not normally "targeted" because that would be a war crime.

 

[Samson]

I thought it would be interesting to start a topic on this when I read this post in another thread:

DGS49, et al,

Like the Secretary-General says, "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." Not even this disparity in equipment and technological superior arms. THAT IS AN INVALID EXCUSE. But it is one that the Hostile Arab-Palestinian uses quite frequently.

First - what IS terrorism? There are so many definitions but they have some commonality best expressed in the UN declaration below:


UN General Assembly Resolutions

A 1996 non-binding United Nations Declaration to Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to the UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210, described terrorist activities in the following terms:[43]


"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"


Antonio Cassese has argued that the language of this and other similar UN declarations "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism."[44]​

In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there are many clear cut examples of terrorism and many less clear or easily "justified" examples...

The cold-blooded murder of an entire Israeli family in Itmar down to the smallest infant, while they slept in their beds: Itamar massacre: Fogel family butchered while sleeping

The cold blooded fire bombing of a Palestinian family's home while they slept that left a toddler dead, the two parents so severely wounded they died soon after, and a 6 yr old still fighting for his life: Duma arson attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A host of knife attacks against Israeli civilians, of which this is just one: Palestinian girls shot after stabbing elderly man with scissors

Israeli's stone a school bus full of Palestinian girls: Settlers pelt Palestinian school buses

The collective punishment of innocent civilians:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...e-punishment-is-revenge-plain-and-simple.html

A Palestinian woman attacks a guard at a check point: Terror of checkpoint knife attack: Palestinian woman pulls out knife & stabs Israeli guard

The abduction and burning alive of a palestinian teen: Kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Price Tag movement that has been responsible for vandalism, destruction of property and livelyhood, and assaults on civilians: Price tag policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with the statement: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." and define terrorism as acts of violence, or intimidation against civilians for the purpose of a political, ideological, religious or cultural goal.

The only example that I would not consider terrorism is attacking a military target.

Nice Thread/Topic.

Anything can be justified by someone. Rarely is Anything justified by Everyone.

Historically, terrorism has been pretty routine. You want to Win the Next Battle? Don't take prisoners and kill every man woman and child of the enemy. Then threaten the next enemy with the same unless they surrender and become an ally. Rinse, wash, repeat.