Terror?

[ErikViking]

Please move if this is the wrong forum.

Don't you think the word "terrorism" has been some what watered down and misused?

Was this recent event really terrorism? Is there really an organization with an agenda to scare American civil society to silence as mean to gain power?

RAF, IRA and ISIS are/were without doubt into terrorism - they know/knew they can't reach their objectives by conventional warfare or diplomacy. And they use terror as a strategy, not as an act of frustration. Their objective isn't just to kill a number of people - it's to kill a number of people (or some other disturbance) in such fashion that their long term objectives are pursued.

So, topic, has the word terrorism lost some of it's original meaning? Do you think it's overused? (I do)

 

[Si modo]

Just come up with some non-offensive-to-morons euphemism, like workplace violence, for it.

 

[Muhammed]

Please move if this is the wrong forum.

Don't you think the word "terrorism" has been some what watered down and misused?

Was this recent event really terrorism? Is there really an organization with an agenda to scare American civil society to silence as mean to gain power?

RAF, IRA and ISIS are/were without doubt into terrorism - they know/knew they can't reach their objectives by conventional warfare or diplomacy. And they use terror as a strategy, not as an act of frustration. Their objective isn't just to kill a number of people - it's to kill a number of people (or some other disturbance) in such fashion that their long term objectives are pursued.

So, topic, has the word terrorism lost some of it's original meaning? Do you think it's overused? (I do)

What appears to have happened is that terrorists caused a traffic accident, which ended up killing one of the BLM terrorists.

 

[ErikViking]

Just come up with some non-offensive-to-morons euphemism, like workplace violence, for it.

What good would that do? If a person just kills a number of people of a category he hates, it isn't really terrorism - it's plain criminal. Remember, ISIS have no problem killing muslims, it's collateral damage to them at best, or even part of the strategy to drive the wedge deeper.

 

[ErikViking]

Please move if this is the wrong forum.

Don't you think the word "terrorism" has been some what watered down and misused?

Was this recent event really terrorism? Is there really an organization with an agenda to scare American civil society to silence as mean to gain power?

RAF, IRA and ISIS are/were without doubt into terrorism - they know/knew they can't reach their objectives by conventional warfare or diplomacy. And they use terror as a strategy, not as an act of frustration. Their objective isn't just to kill a number of people - it's to kill a number of people (or some other disturbance) in such fashion that their long term objectives are pursued.

So, topic, has the word terrorism lost some of it's original meaning? Do you think it's overused? (I do)

What appears to have happened is that terrorists caused a traffic accident, which ended up killing one of the BLM terrorists.

So you define terrorism solely from a political stand point?