Either I'm having an allergic reaction to this cold medicine OR

Perhaps I should say, according to the white house there seems to be many more incidents of work place violence involving international non employees with a grievance.

BO's reasoning for not calling it terrorism could be something as simple as, if he says it's terrorism the insurance policies won't have to pay out under acts of terrorism exclusions in most policies. We all know how much he hates big insurance companies and has worked to undermine them since day one. There's no way if he can help it is he doing anything to give them a way to exclude coverage.

"Another common definition is political, ideological or religious violence by non-state actors." The Taliban are not an official government so yes, this would be classified as terrorism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck

I will be in the minority I know.

BUT... if they attack our military or contractors in their country, to me its not terrorism.

if a country decided to attack our country and we killed and blew up the foreign invaders, would that be terrorism? or?

because if another country attacks us, you can bet a whole lot of Americans would be doing the same thing to their military.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck

I will be in the minority I know.

BUT... if they attack our military or contractors in their country, to me its not terrorism.

if a country decided to attack our country and we killed and blew up the foreign invaders, would that be terrorism? or?

because if another country attacks us, you can bet a whole lot of Americans would be doing the same thing to their military.

---

I think it depends.
If they are using terror as a tool to achieve their goal, then I would still call it terrorism.
If they are simply trying to kill our military or contractors, then I would simply call it war. War is Hell. War is ugly. Sometimes war comes to you and sometimes you bring the pain to others in faraway lands.

In this war, our enemy has successfully employed terrorism to some effect, and we have successfully employed JDAMs to a very different effect.


ETA:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck

so, they are not like a Militia? If you or I tried to save our homeland from an invading force, but we werent actually certified as military or agent of the government we would be terrorists? well then alot of us would be terrorists, but I dont see it that way.

---

Definition aside, I most definitely would be a terrorist, if it was the most effective means. I would do whatever it takes to defend my home and native land from foreign invaders, especially if attacking them at home was an effective way to win the war.

However, I still think that whether or not you call it terrorism depends on the means they use to achieve their goals.

Red Dawn Wolverines - Terrorists?

You confuse "saving a homeland" with "keeping our power." The are killing their own people along with our people so just what does it take, in your mind, to declare them terrorists? There is a legitimate government in Afghanistan right now, as elected by the people, and the Taliban are using terrorist tactics to destabilize that government. They are not freedom fighters.

If you encourage and employ suicide bombers, you just might be a terrorist organization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davsel

Red Dawn Wolverines - Terrorists?

---

Did they use terror to achieve their goals?

Not sure if you feel I'm arguing with you HBAR, I'm just throwing stuff out there.
I agree with you so far.

How bout the Muslim Brotherhood - terrorist organization?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoneyBadger

Did they use terror to achieve their goals?

---

No just CGI