Posted on Apr 30, 2015
Should we adopt terrorist ideology by accepting their label of terrorists" or undermine the ideology by calling them "Criminals"?
2.21K
30
12
1
1
0
Yes, this is slightly similar to a previous topic, but this one is a survey and is not about "M" "terrorists; about ALL such insurgents/criminals.
Yes, we should care what we call them. To adopt terrorist ideology implies we accept their premise. And the word also implies fear.
Yes, we should care what we call them. To adopt terrorist ideology implies we accept their premise. And the word also implies fear.
Terrorism
Crime
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 10
We are not adapting to their ideology, we are just labeling things what they are.
If somebody calls themselves an enemy of the United States, and we call them an enemy of the United States, we are not "adopting" to their ideology.
We also didn't adapt ourselves in WWII when we called Nazis... Nazis. Let's not start trying to skew reality by not calling things what they are. That's the height of PC.
If somebody calls themselves an enemy of the United States, and we call them an enemy of the United States, we are not "adopting" to their ideology.
We also didn't adapt ourselves in WWII when we called Nazis... Nazis. Let's not start trying to skew reality by not calling things what they are. That's the height of PC.
(4)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
MAJ Weiss, with respect that sounds reasonable. And I am not a fan of PC, but a student of propaganda. Read Terrorism, from Robespierre to Arafat by Albert Parry, once required reading in UofM Course in Sociology of Terrorism and other training in Hostage Negotiation. Nazis were a distinct political party; yet we took care to denote criminals and criminal acts in our own propaganda during and after the war--partly to ensure that our own people saw themselves as fighting on the right side. According to noted sociologists, adoption of an adversary's lingo can help reinforce and recognize their ideology as being on an equal status, vs criminal acts, thus tending to indoctrinate and desensitize current members and future recruits by dehumanizing an enemy, in such a way that they believe their acts are not criminal, but "acts of war", not ideology. Therefore, call them terrorists if you will but also point out they are criminals engaged in criminal acts. That's not PC. It is truth even under the laws of war.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Words have meaning and consequences. To label a terrorist as a criminal is to shift responsibility for dealing with them from the military to civilian law enforcement. It provides terrorists with protections that they don't deserve.
If anyone wants to reclassify them, how about "pirates": "Non-state actors engaging in war-like activities". Anyone caught in the act should then be summarily executed. Under American law, the Supreme Court has nisi prius (original) jurisdiction in all cases of piracy. No appeal necessary.
If anyone wants to reclassify them, how about "pirates": "Non-state actors engaging in war-like activities". Anyone caught in the act should then be summarily executed. Under American law, the Supreme Court has nisi prius (original) jurisdiction in all cases of piracy. No appeal necessary.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
My thoughts are we as American's need to not cater or accept any other ideology showing weakness to anyone. Terrorists are just that.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google