Spendulus
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
 |
August 02, 2014, 01:01:53 PM |
|
Man, I love Trotsky...
Terrorism is no good, but armed (and certainly even unarmed) resistance is fairly effective, evident by almost ever US and Russian adventure in the Middle East and Asia. We erroneously conflate resistance with terrorism when there is not always any kind of "terrorism" (a completely abused word -- one who causes terror? Jeez, my daughter frequently commits acts of terrorism!).
Someone shooting a US soldier or contractor is not likely a terrorist, probably just a resistance member (which we now call "enemy combatants," which is generally implied synonymous with "terrorist" without seeming so as text). Shooting civilians is an act of terrorism, and while there are terrorists among enemies of the US government, US contractors (at least) have also committed acts of terror. Somehow, though, we don't have a massive brain attack and suddenly call the US government a terrorist organization just because of that (well, a few people do). Perhaps a double standard. There are both terrorists and resistance fighters in every nation the US government is currently occupying, as well as inside the United States.
(sorry to post something which seems really obvious... not sure that's even a contribution)
I don't see any difficulty in defining terrorism. None at all. Things like suicide bombers walking into restraunts and blowing innocent people up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to be a moderator, report many posts with accuracy. You will be noticed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Ekaros
|
|
August 02, 2014, 01:15:48 PM |
|
Man, I love Trotsky...
Terrorism is no good, but armed (and certainly even unarmed) resistance is fairly effective, evident by almost ever US and Russian adventure in the Middle East and Asia. We erroneously conflate resistance with terrorism when there is not always any kind of "terrorism" (a completely abused word -- one who causes terror? Jeez, my daughter frequently commits acts of terrorism!).
Someone shooting a US soldier or contractor is not likely a terrorist, probably just a resistance member (which we now call "enemy combatants," which is generally implied synonymous with "terrorist" without seeming so as text). Shooting civilians is an act of terrorism, and while there are terrorists among enemies of the US government, US contractors (at least) have also committed acts of terror. Somehow, though, we don't have a massive brain attack and suddenly call the US government a terrorist organization just because of that (well, a few people do). Perhaps a double standard. There are both terrorists and resistance fighters in every nation the US government is currently occupying, as well as inside the United States.
(sorry to post something which seems really obvious... not sure that's even a contribution)
I don't see any difficulty in defining terrorism. None at all. Things like suicide bombers walking into restraunts and blowing innocent people up. Also things like bomb strikes, smart missiles, secret prisons and so on. |
|
|
|
|
Jamie_Boulder
|
|
August 02, 2014, 01:21:51 PM |
|
I imagine it goes further than simply wanting to terrorize people, I've seen a few documentaries where these people are brought up with the expectation of doing this stuff one day & risk having their whole family killed if they refuse.....gotta love the extremest whackos
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
August 02, 2014, 11:59:31 PM |
|
Man, I love Trotsky...
Terrorism is no good, but armed (and certainly even unarmed) resistance is fairly effective, evident by almost ever US and Russian adventure in the Middle East and Asia. We erroneously conflate resistance with terrorism when there is not always any kind of "terrorism" (a completely abused word -- one who causes terror? Jeez, my daughter frequently commits acts of terrorism!).
Someone shooting a US soldier or contractor is not likely a terrorist, probably just a resistance member (which we now call "enemy combatants," which is generally implied synonymous with "terrorist" without seeming so as text). Shooting civilians is an act of terrorism, and while there are terrorists among enemies of the US government, US contractors (at least) have also committed acts of terror. Somehow, though, we don't have a massive brain attack and suddenly call the US government a terrorist organization just because of that (well, a few people do). Perhaps a double standard. There are both terrorists and resistance fighters in every nation the US government is currently occupying, as well as inside the United States.
(sorry to post something which seems really obvious... not sure that's even a contribution)
I don't see any difficulty in defining terrorism. None at all. Things like suicide bombers walking into restraunts and blowing innocent people up. Also things like bomb strikes, smart missiles, secret prisons and so on. Okay, I'll buy that if and when such devices are used with the purpose of instilling fear into a population, as opposed to the rather simple matter of killing the enemy or imprisoning and yes, torturing him. Stalin said something to the effect "the more innocent they be, persecute them that much more". That's the essence of terrorism, coming from a Statist advocate of it's use. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
August 03, 2014, 12:01:19 AM |
|
I imagine it goes further than simply wanting to terrorize people, I've seen a few documentaries where these people are brought up with the expectation of doing this stuff one day & risk having their whole family killed if they refuse.....gotta love the extremest whackos
Right, the suicide bomber who is told he has 2 hours to do the job or his family is killed. But there is no need to look at individual motive, to understand terrorism, because it is defined by it's effects on the target and target population. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mobius
|
|
August 03, 2014, 04:01:47 AM |
|
I imagine it goes further than simply wanting to terrorize people, I've seen a few documentaries where these people are brought up with the expectation of doing this stuff one day & risk having their whole family killed if they refuse.....gotta love the extremest whackos
Right, the suicide bomber who is told he has 2 hours to do the job or his family is killed. But there is no need to look at individual motive, to understand terrorism, because it is defined by it's effects on the target and target population. This. Terrorism is designed to make people afraid. The people behind terrorism usually want to get the government of the people they are terrorizing to meet certain demands. As a general rule most governments will refuse to negotiate with terrorists so it is very rare that terrorists ever get what they want. |
|
|
|
|
|
