Excessive use of force in war

No. Terrorism is to attack civilians with covert operatives.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

wiki:

dictionary:

other dictionary:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

those are all pretty wide definitions...

the wiki is probably closer to the general consensus.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Academic consensus definition provided by the United Nations:

 

So if a suicide bomber runs into a crowded square and screams "Allah Akbar" and then explodes, killing 50 civilians, it's not terrorism? That wouldn't be covert in the slightest.

 

he is a flag waver, that only sees in red white and blue.

dont bother reasoning with him.


shit, i consider a guy running down the street with a screwdriver stabbing folks while wearing a political placard telling me to "vote labour party" to be terrorism.
(this didnt happen, it is just some random shit i thought of that would terrorize the fuck out of ME)

 

as far as terrorism is concerned there is no single definition for it.

 

Sure it would. The guy would have been disguising himself as a civilian up until the attack.

 

Nah. I see in reality.

Reasoning is fine, but I'm not going to accept a position that is contrary to reality.

 

could have fooled me.

 

the flight 93 hijackers would have dressed them selves as civillians before they turned a plane into a guided missile, so by your logic does that mean that 9/11 was not an act of terrorism, and remember it has been classified as an act of terrorism by the UN

 

Being disguised as civilians is an argument that it is terrorism, not an argument against.

That said, 9/11 is sort of on the borderline between terrorism and a crime against humanity.

 

Note the fact that everything I've said so far is fully in line with reality.

 

no, it isnt.

terrorism isnt covert. right wingers arent right, anymore than left wingers.

that disqualifies just about everything you have posted.

so i have deemed, so it shall be.

 

Yes it is.

The academic consensus says otherwise.

That has no bearing on anything I've said whatsoever.

You haven't even addressed all the correct facts I've posted regarding the end of WWII.

 

oralloy the Devil Inside never address the fact he argues from the left wing politically correct history, so trying to make a point with some one who doesn't even recognize reality is futile, so the argument become circular as you present provable fact and they wouldn't recognize a fact if it ran over them in a Semi, but it's fun to do, because it's funny to watch the contortions that they go through to deny reality, and fanatics they present as facts to support their PC world view.

 

Whats the definition of a "Freedom Fighter"

 

the 9-11 attacks were terrorism. there is no 'sort of' about it.

 

one countrys terrorist is another countrys freedom fighter?

 

Human Rights Watch once called the attacks a crime against humanity.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/09/sept11.htm