What counts as terrorism?

Nomenclature

Argument Topic: Interesting Question.

In recent years, the term has become little more than a propaganda weapon of government: a word describing any type of guerrilla warfare undertaken by a smaller insurgency against a state power (provided that state power is -- or is allied with -- the United States). Hitler used a similar approach to win popular support against the French resistance. Of course, any terrorist group advancing the objectives of the United States or its allies is labelled as something else. Perhaps the most well-known example of this hypocrisy was Reagan's doting description of the Mujahideen as "freedom fighters" while they were at war against Russia, only for them to suddenly become "enemies of freedom" and "terrorists" once they turned against the United States.

The problem with any objective definition of terrorism is that the United States and its allies are always going to be guilty of supporting it, if not actively pursuing it as a foreign policy. The carpet bombing of Cambodia was terrorism. The My Lai massacre was terrorism. The Mahmudiya massacre was terrorism.  Poisoning the Vietnamese food supply was terrorism. The Collateral Murder video was terrorism. A good argument could even be made that the sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s was a new kind of economic terrorism.

And, of course, let's not forget the absolute mother of all terrorist attacks: the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which between them wiped out somewhere in the region of 250,000 civilians.

You can't really make a legitimate argument that the United States doesn't deliberately murder civilians, because it does. It plainly does. Granted, there's usually a military objective involved, but frequently it knows full well there will be civilian casualties if it takes a particular action and it takes the action anyway. That's terrorism. 

To really understand terrorism, I think it's important to put warfare into perspective. Given the choice, most of the suicide bombers in the Middle East who blow up markets and kill innocent people would much sooner storm the nearest American base armed with machine guns and fight it out with their actual enemies. But that type of direct strategy is closed to them because they don't have the weapons, manpower or training to challenge a trillion dollar war machine. Hence, in order to be militarily effective they have to choose different tactics. Questions of morality aren't much of a concern to people who genuinely believe they are at war, and nowhere is that more evident than in actions the United States has itself taken while at war. Any army or militia is simply going to adopt the tactics they believe are most likely to win them victory. 

And even if we use a much looser definition of terrorism, where we assume it means any strategy designed to cause a population to live in fear, then it only further incriminates the United States. There's more chance civilians in the Middle East are going to be casualties in a drone strike than a suicide bombing. When polled about who is the greatest threat to world peace, the overwhelming majority of respondents answer the United States, so there is far more fear of the American military than any domestic threat. 

Barnardot

@Dee Well every one settles down in the end when you analize it because its the same with revolutions because what the Bolshis were were terrorists really and then when the y took over all of a sudden they were called heros. But what peas me off in the end is that thats what happens in the end that terrorists who killed every one in site become such heros and people say oh yeah my grandad was a terrorist and in the end he was right.

Dee

@Nomenclature

I agree Nom great piece , I've said over the years the biggest threat to world peace are American religious  loons who see threats everywhere , a mostly brainwashed nation sees anyone that's  not like them must obviously be a "commie" , "Moooooslum " or a terrorist , most Americans on here think progressive social policies automatically makes us all rabid anti American Stalinists.

Remember Butcher Bush said "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists "

Thats it there anyone not with the yanks is obviously an enemy.

Dee

@Barnardot

But what peas me off in the end is that thats what happens in the end that terrorists who killed every one in site become such heros and people say oh yeah my grandad was a terrorist and in the end he was right.

Yes but Americans seem to think because you wear a uniform and drop Atomic bombs on a nation your granddaddy was a hero so what makes one right and one wrong?  The biggest dog in the group seems to think he's the only deserves the biggest bone.

Nomenclature

@Dee

Remember Butcher Bush said "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists "

I absolutely do my friend. A classic piece of emotional blackmail.

maxx

terrorism, no matter who, or where are, ones who attack, shoot, and blow up innocent civilians, instead of  fighting soldiers. It is one thing where the military of one country to go after the military of another, in where there may be civilian casualties; however, for an organization, or person[s] to actively, deliberately, and on purpose, single out innocent people in the name of freedom, that is nothing more than terrorism.  @Dee

Dee

@maxx

terrorism, no matter who, or where are, ones who attack, shoot, and blow up innocent civilians, instead of  fighting soldiers.

You mean like when the US dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 



It is one thing where the military of one country to go after the military of another, in where there may be civilian casualties; however, for an organization, or person[s] to actively, deliberately, and on purpose, single out innocent people in the name of freedom, that is nothing more than terrorism.

I agree and accept that the US engaged in acts of terrorism using your definitions of such as below......

terrorism, no matter who, or where are, ones who attack, shoot, and blow up innocent civilians, instead of  fighting soldiers.........


Watch now the big exception to Maxxs rules is without a doubt going  to be the good ole USA .....

maxx

any time any country or organization or persons go after innocent people instead of engaging the actual enemy; it is terrorism; including if the united states did so, or The I.R.A or anyone. @Dee a massacre of people simply because they happen to live in a place that others hate the government of is terrorism. engaging the enemy who is willing and able to fight back, is war fare. Killing innocents  with the sole intention of doing so, is not. 

Dee

@maxx

any time any country or organization or persons go after innocent people instead of engaging the actual enemy; it is terrorism; including if the united states did so,

In fairness full marks to you Maxx for not making an exception and apologies for assuming you would.

 or The I.R.A or anyone. @Dee a massacre of people simply because they happen to live in a place that others hate the government of is terrorism. engaging the enemy who is willing and able to fight back, is war fare. Killing innocents  with the sole intention of doing so, is not. 

It's dreadful the way in these conflicts it's always working class working men , women and children who pay the price.

Conflict gets really savage when people are pushed so far and have no access to Justice , in the case of my country the population was and is tiny and was up against the might of the British forces , there was no justice or even the semblance of fairness for Catholics in the North , the I.R.A. as a stand alone army hadn't a chance against the manpower of the British army this  they knew , terrorist organisations come into being when people have no recourse to any of the rights granted to other citizens, the only way around these situations is open dialogue with mediators aiding the process , it worked here eventually and the country is totally different to what it was. 

Thanks for your input 

maxx

true. there has always been terrorism and probably always will be for humans are warlike in nature. Since ancient times; they have justified their action based on many variables: religion, territory, resources and land, or just simple hate and greed. @Dee

John_C_87

What counts as terrorism?

Laws on Terrorism are fear based.