no no no, terrorism is what THEY do

War - Violence conducted by a state to control populations or to seize resources.

Terrorism - Violence conducted by a non-state to control populations or seize resources.

Warrior - Throws bomb from jet.

Terrorist - Throws bomb from car.

Wanna really get sick? Google on 'Orlando Bosch' or 'Cuban Jetliner Bombing' and read the story of how real terrorists* are treated by the US government.

(*anti-cuban terrorists that is)

--bozo Tue Mar 18 09:36:42 2003

There is a huge moral difference between trying not to kill civilians during a war and trying to kill civilians when there is no war.

--Au Skeptic Wed Mar 19 04:49:45 2003

Sorry, I don't buy the notion that "war" doesn't target civilians.

Let's start down a short list with about a million dead. (I'm just listing actions by the US)

The Dresden firebombing, Tokyo firebombing, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Gen. Curtis LeMay, the architect of the Japanese firebombing campaign remarked himself that "if we had been on the losing side, I would have been tried as a war criminal". 

More recently our modern starvation sanctions against Iraq, including the bombing of water treatment and sanitation could be treated as war crimes under the 4th Geneva convention. 

Then we also have the concept of 'terror by proxy'.  The CIA involvement in Chile, US-trained death squads in Central America, and the Contra Drugs-For-Guns program are shining examples of this.

Of course, even though we never 'pulled the trigger' no doubt we still have nuclear missiles targeted at many of the worlds major cities with the intent of killing tens of millions of civilians.

None of the above justifies the acts of lunatic-fringe people like Bin Laden, but is intended to point out that it's ALL dirty business with the same intent.

"To control populations or seize resources" 

--bozo Wed Mar 19 10:01:52 2003

This may sound facetious but the purpose of war is to win. All other considerations are secondary.

I'm not old enough or familiar enough with the situation to have a strong opinion on whether firebombing tokyo was bad, but I know that even though it was painfully obvious that the US would win the Japanese kept fighting. It seems that a common thread here is that one side starts killing civilians to end a war that has already been effectively won, but won't end.

--Eric Wed Mar 19 11:28:21 2003

Kirk - freakishly good point about terrorism vs. war. I saw The Pianist yesterday and I wonder if the Nazi's would describe what they were doing to the Warsaw Jews as terrorism or war's collateral damage.

--Rhetoric Wed Mar 19 14:19:31 2003

Best terrorism definition I've seen, shamelessly borrowed from Counterpunch...

Terrorism - Use of violence or intimidation against civilian populations for political, economic, or religious purposes without prior sanction of the United States
government.

--bozo Wed Mar 19 21:10:28 2003

I thought you might give me something to think about and change my mind about things, but it turns out you're just anti-american. How boring.

--Au Skeptic Thu Mar 20 01:53:26 2003

Comments Disabled... (Thanks Dirty Rotten Spammers)
Feel free to write kirkjerk at gmail dot com!