I think this definition waters down the more traditional definition which I
thought included targeting civilians to create terror and weaken the will of
the other party to fight. For example, one could argue that Iraq insurgences
aren't being terrorists when they blow up a US Humvee. And history tends to
modify the definition based on success. Terrorists for the losers. Freedom
fighters for the winners.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anytime somebody violently attacks someone else to accomplish a
political objective, it's terrorism unless it's self defense. So yes,
*I* consider the insurgency attacks terrorism and therefore
unjustified.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
