Last edited by stef (2006-02-05 06:53:45)
hmm..but where do you draw the line between war and terrorism then ? For example, a lot of countries / governments would qualify as terrorists under that ( very broad ) definition. A lot of governments have used violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims...Marconius wrote:
ter•ror•ism [noun] -
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
The word actually comes from the French Revolution, where the Jacobins used violence and repression to pursue the principles of democracy and equality.
And FFS guys, don't turn this thread into yet again another anti-US thread. Save your "the US needs to get attacked again!!1!oneone" rhetoric for the "I hate the US" thread or just don't spout it at all.
Exactly. And others say the definition is "to cause terror". You don't think over in other places some people are terrified of us? Thats is what the word means, but that is not how it is used. When I think about it, the word "terrorist" is mostly used to classify people who attack civilians. But the funny thing is, I can't remember the actual stat, but we have killed very many civilians over in Iraq. Why doesn't anyone call us terrorists?B.Schuss wrote:
hmm..but where do you draw the line between war and terrorism then ? For example, a lot of countries / governments would qualify as terrorists under that ( very broad ) definition. A lot of governments have used violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims...Marconius wrote:
ter•ror•ism [noun] -
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
The word actually comes from the French Revolution, where the Jacobins used violence and repression to pursue the principles of democracy and equality.
And FFS guys, don't turn this thread into yet again another anti-US thread. Save your "the US needs to get attacked again!!1!oneone" rhetoric for the "I hate the US" thread or just don't spout it at all.
because we are the good ones...we fight for freedom and democracy, we have good intentions...lol...[/sarcasm]Homeschtar wrote:
Exactly. And others say the definition is "to cause terror". You don't think over in other places some people are terrified of us? Thats is what the word means, but that is not how it is used. When I think about it, the word "terrorist" is mostly used to classify people who attack civilians. But the funny thing is, I can't remember the actual stat, but we have killed very many civilians over in Iraq. Why doesn't anyone call us terrorists?B.Schuss wrote:
hmm..but where do you draw the line between war and terrorism then ? For example, a lot of countries / governments would qualify as terrorists under that ( very broad ) definition. A lot of governments have used violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims...Marconius wrote:
ter•ror•ism [noun] -
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
The word actually comes from the French Revolution, where the Jacobins used violence and repression to pursue the principles of democracy and equality.
And FFS guys, don't turn this thread into yet again another anti-US thread. Save your "the US needs to get attacked again!!1!oneone" rhetoric for the "I hate the US" thread or just don't spout it at all.
Oh yes, Americans are always right , land of the free and all that.B.Schuss wrote:
because we are the good ones...we fight for freedom and democracy, we have good intentions...lol...[/sarcasm]Homeschtar wrote:
Exactly. And others say the definition is "to cause terror". You don't think over in other places some people are terrified of us? Thats is what the word means, but that is not how it is used. When I think about it, the word "terrorist" is mostly used to classify people who attack civilians. But the funny thing is, I can't remember the actual stat, but we have killed very many civilians over in Iraq. Why doesn't anyone call us terrorists?B.Schuss wrote:
hmm..but where do you draw the line between war and terrorism then ? For example, a lot of countries / governments would qualify as terrorists under that ( very broad ) definition. A lot of governments have used violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims...
and, let's not forget, we have the lord on our side.
Last edited by I2elik (2006-02-07 02:35:10)
How so? If you're talking about that war between them and Pakistan (I think it is?), then you're kind of right, depends how far you wanna stretch that back, the americans and various other countries employed terror tactics in Vietnam, such as Napalm.Greenie_Beazinie wrote:
Modern terrorism was started by the Isrealis.