4
4
0
Here on RP we've done a lot of talking about Terrorism, but it occurred to me we don't agree about what Terrorism is. Words have meaning, so we should probably hash this one out. It appears to be a pretty big task: Wikipedia says
"There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term terrorism"
So let's look at it. A lot of us here have been involved in a "Global War on Terror". What have we been fighting?
I'd say a good starting point are the various US Government Definitions. I pasted three of them. Please take a minute to read over the differences (or nerd out over at Wikipedia for a while) then vote and post.
Which comes the closest?
1. Title 22, Chapter 38 of the United States Code (regarding the Department of State) contains a definition of terrorism in its requirement that annual country reports on terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year.
"[T]he term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"
2. Title 18 of the United States Code (regarding criminal acts and criminal procedure) defines international terrorism as:
(1) [T]he term 'international terrorism' means activities that —
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended —
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum".[54]
3. DOD Joint Pub 3-07.2, Antiterrorism (24 November 2010), the Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies. Terrorism is often motivated by religious, political, or other ideological beliefs and committed in the pursuit of goals that are usually political."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism
"There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term terrorism"
So let's look at it. A lot of us here have been involved in a "Global War on Terror". What have we been fighting?
I'd say a good starting point are the various US Government Definitions. I pasted three of them. Please take a minute to read over the differences (or nerd out over at Wikipedia for a while) then vote and post.
Which comes the closest?
1. Title 22, Chapter 38 of the United States Code (regarding the Department of State) contains a definition of terrorism in its requirement that annual country reports on terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year.
"[T]he term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"
2. Title 18 of the United States Code (regarding criminal acts and criminal procedure) defines international terrorism as:
(1) [T]he term 'international terrorism' means activities that —
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended —
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum".[54]
3. DOD Joint Pub 3-07.2, Antiterrorism (24 November 2010), the Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies. Terrorism is often motivated by religious, political, or other ideological beliefs and committed in the pursuit of goals that are usually political."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism
Terrorism
Law
GWOT
PME
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
6
6
0
"Our" Nation has had our hands very bloody and VERY DIRTY over the centuries. As a species, humans are capable of the most despicable actions. If you want to get biblical, humans lasted just one generation before having it's first murder. Terrorism? Ask our poor Native Americans about terrorism. We routinely go back to the last time we were on the short end of the stick and use that to justify our actions. We wiped out "savages" because we were suffering injustices in England and wanted to be free of that so we went elsewhere laying claims. People have been conquering and being conquered since the beginning. Had we lost WWII, can you imagine what would have been said about the carpet bombing that was done throughout Europe primarily by the British and Americans? The Russians and Germans were allies during WWII yet the Germans turned on their own partners in crime. The English bombed their French allies' navy and killed hundreds juuuuuuust in case they were a little slow to scuttle their warships, despite the French admiralty assuring them it would never allow the ships to fall into German hands. We can justify just about anything we do as long as we have access to the book writers after the victory. For us Sci-fi nerds: Darth Vader. Good guy because at the last second he punked out the Emperor when his back was turned? Does that make up for wiping out the Jedi order? I say terrorist. But that was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away....(lol)
(6)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SFC Mark Merino Well said. I think a good definition of Terrorism is 'act' focused rather than ultimate motivation or actor focused. And thus can be applied over time and space. Even a long time ago in a galaxy far away. I would say Darth Vaders' terrorism was destroying all of Alderaan to compel other planets into compliance through fear. Jedi strike me as pretty legitimate military targets. (How did the death-star move through space-and thus act as a credible terror-threat to other planets?)
(2)
(0)
SFC Mark Merino
Thanks for indulging the nerd with his Star Wars analogy! I shall call you...Obi Wan. Semper Fi.
(2)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SFC Mark Merino Obi-wan was a badass. Maybe the best. Who knows with Qui-gon and yoda in the running.... I'd follow any of them into battle.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Terrorism - literally the way of terror will have slightly different definitions for most people. My simplest definition would be to instill fear for the sake of instilling fear, with or without a clear goal.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Capt Richard I P., One might also grade terrorism on a sliding scale. What is acceptable changes greatly overtime. Sherman's march to the seas, borderline genocidal practices, the almost utter destruction of German cities, dropping nukes on Japan. All were "acceptable" during their specific time frames.
(3)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
TSgt Joshua Copeland Great points, time changes the acceptance of terrorism as a legitmate action. Romans would crucify hundreds when cities were sacked, Assyrians would flay city leaders alive and nail their skins to gates. Sherman was all about property destruction (I will note his troops were under orders not to kill civilians). I would say these are all still terrorism (except maybe Sherman's march as I understand it), in the way I define it, they were just more acceptable then than they are now.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
in police academy we had a course called Response to Terrorist Act. it defined it as an deliberate act designed to cause fear in individuals by causing mass injury/death, typically performed by someone who adheres to a strict ideology.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google