The noose is tightening on arafat

[Estilpón]

I don't think house demolitions can rightly be considered terrorism.

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons

¿?

[DinoDoc]

The heart of your post was about "proving" that the demolitions are terrorism ...

Originally posted by Osweld

and I proved that it was not based on the very definition your provided.

[General Ludd]

The equivalent of your reply...

Originally posted by DinoDoc


and I proved that it was not based on the very definition your provided.

No.


By the way, the 'heart' of my post is that arguing about semantics is only clouding the issue, and it really doesn't matter what you call it.

[DinoDoc]

According to your definition, state terrorism doesn't exist.

Originally posted by Osweld
No.

And if it didn't matter what you called it why head straight for as loaded and murky term as terrorism?

[Natan]

Originally posted by Estilpón






¿?

The goal of the house demolitions is not to intimidate people - it's to clear away sniper's nests and uncover weapons smuggling tunnels.

[The diplomat]

I just read at www.jpost.com that the Hezbullah has begn intense shelling on IDF posts in Nothern Israel with katyusha rockets, mortar shells and anti-tank rockets. The IAF has responded with strikes in southern Lebanon.

Could someone in Israel give some more details maybe? What is happening now?

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Which ones? People like the French resistance were operating on behalf of a recognised government - the French govt in exile.

I think we may have a disagreement on the definition of the word 'terrorist'....

So a terrorist group are not operating under the control of an aknoweldged gouvernement.

If you are a gouvernment you can to terror act without being called terrorist.

[General Ludd]

Do I have to spell it out for you?

Do you not realise that you can't just say "no" you have to say why - why that definition contradicts what I said.


And I am not comparing it to terrorism, other people are - and I am agreeing that it is. But I could not care less what you want to call it, no matter what word you subsribe to it, it will still be the same thing, and just as wrong. And that is what i said in my post.


Just to clarify - I will go over and explain every part of my post so you might understand it.

See my previous post.

Here, what I am saying is that he is still ignoring or rationalizing the problem in order to cloud the issue, or dismiss it completely. ie. he is arguing semantics, or just flatly saying that "no, that's not a problem". - he isn't actually saying anything.

But if you really think that, maybe you should go back to page one and read the definition. Or if you want, I'll give you another definition, from dictionary.com:

Here, since he seems to be arguing semantics, I tell him to read the definitions of terrorism.

I don't see why people are arguing about semantics, anyways... regardless of what you want to call it, it's not right.

And here, I am saying that bickering about semantics is only clouding the issue, it doesn't change the subject one bit at all, and no matter what word you give it, it is the same thing.

[Natan]

Re: Do I have to spell it out for you?

Osweld, the issue was clouded when people compared house demolitions to murder so they could make baseless moral equivalencies. My pointing out the difference between damage to property and violent death was clarifying the issue.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by ZoboZeWarrior
If you are a gouvernment you can to terror act without being called terrorist.

Exactly!

But then it is usually less covert and falls under the heading of 'keeping order' or 'removing disruptive elements from society'.

[faded glory]

Guys I believe the question of "When is a freedom fighter, not a freedom fighter, but a terrorist" has been asked many times on ACS. So why dance around the edges here? Go make a seperate thread.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

"Who never post out of subject post throws the first rocket !"

[HisMajestyBOB]

Terrorists aim for civilians.

Guerrillas (or Freedom fighters, depending on your side) aim at military installations, soldiers, etc. NOT civilians. Some civilians might be killed, but its Wrong Place Wrong Time (ie. **** Happens)

Therefore, French, Russian, etc Resistance were, for the most part, guerillas (attacking German troops).