Thread: What is Terrorism
11-12-2009, 02:37 PM
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Northern Virginia
Pearl Harbor was an act of war because it was the deliberate policy act of another government, not individual loonies using planes to make a point."Today, [the American voter] chooses his rulers as he buys bootleg whiskey, never knowing precisely what he is getting, only certain that it is not what it pretends to be." - H.L. Mencken
11-12-2009, 02:51 PMI feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
11-12-2009, 02:54 PM
It seems we realized what effect the word had on people have 9/11 and now we are starting to apply it to everything in order to generate the same effect in situations where it may or may not be needed. We take words and us them as a modern version of crying wolf when their are no wolves around. Was the Ft. Hood shooter a wolf? Probably. Maybe, however, he just wanted for people to think of him as a wolf when in reality he is just a scared little man who realized how insignificant he is and wanted to make a difference by pretending to be something that he wasn't.
Just a thought.
Please don't shoot me
11-12-2009, 02:58 PMI feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
11-12-2009, 02:59 PM
What is terrorism? Patriots cooking of course! :D
In all seriousness - terrorism is a random act of violence where the main intent or even result is inspiring fear and discomfort in a group of people with the intent of influencing the choices / actions / policies of that group.Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
11-12-2009, 03:04 PM
I always thought terrorism was a technique, or method of attack, that involved small, targeted attacks instead of a full-army invasion. As a kid, one of the first contexts I heard the term used in was the Vietnam War-the way the Vietcong fought the US was called terrorism by television commentators.
I personally understand why no one wanted to call the Ft. Hood shootings a terrorist attack before all the evidence was in, because everyone seems to have a different definition of what the term means. What does it mean in a legal/prosecutorial sense or a tactical sense? Does it go to motive?
The guy at Ft. Hood's motive was to kill some in order to terrorize everyone. That makes it terrorism in the motive sense and in the tactical sense, but I'm not sure it does in a legal sense, if his actions that day alone are being judged. But with the info coming out about his attempts to contact al Queda and all, it will probably be easier to make the statement that he is a terrorist.
11-12-2009, 03:07 PM
Hey I have no issues with dropping the nukes on Japan, I'm just trying to muddy the waters a little bit. In times of war things happen but now we are trying to fight these battles with rules and it seems that anything that falls outside of those rules is considered terrorism by one side or the other. There weren't really a lot of rules in WWII other than kill your enemy before he kills you and in some cases the distinction between military and civilian was not made nor did it matter. The birth of terrorism seems to be that we now have rules and make these distinctions.
Please don't shoot me
11-12-2009, 03:52 PM
I think our problem is with semantics. I've always thought that the division between terrorism and anything else was largely illusory. Noonwitch is right in that terrorism is more a technique of war rather than a substantially different thing.
Now, was this an act of war committed against the U.S. military by a traitor? You bet. The guy is clearly a traitor so there's no argument against that. Did he see himself as part of a far flung an enemy force? Yep.
That's about all I need to know in terms of labeling or categorizing this event.
However, political correctness probably forbids the use of "traitor" as a descriptor these days.
11-12-2009, 03:53 PM
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
11-12-2009, 04:07 PMI feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|