Sure, if he straps himself with explosives we call him a terrorist.
If he orders a B-2 to blow up a school we call him a savior...
Theres shit loads of non-muslim international terrorists all around the world. Check out this site for some more listings (the list is even compiled by the american state department):
but suicide bombings seem to be almost unique to islam.
Until Blair & Bush bomb the Poppy Fields as was promised in the aftermath of Sept 11th they will carry on killing our kids with Heroin.Paying farmers money to stop them from growing the poppy fields really worked I don't think.Bombing the poppy fields would be a cheaper option
Kamekaze pilots were not Islamic ILW.
Age is getting to me. I thought patio doors was an Irish country singer.
Muslim terrorist... theres no such thing as a non-terrorist, it all depends on the views of the people and how they define things, the west says "They are directly attacking our way of life, they wish to destroy it and further more have launched attacks which killed and injured thousands of civilians, and the groups responsible are terrorists... muslim terrorist, even the columbians" and the east says "They are directly attacking our way of life they wish to destroy it and further more have launched attacks which have killed and injured thousands of civilians, and the armies responsible are terrorists.... americans terrorists... even the indians"
Its a war between two ideoligies one of materialism and the other of spiritualism, both sides throw accusations around, both sides kill innocence, at the end of the day it all comes down to how you, the individual define terrorism, for many even non-muslims see the suicide bomber of Palestine as a brave soldier and the Israeli sniper the terrorist and then again there are those who see the B-52 (or whatever) bomber as the hero of the hour and the poor shepherd sitting in his farm oblivious to the fact that 2 tons of explosives is going to cook his sheep sooner then he wanted is the terrorist, to me the one who kills the most for no reason is the terrorist. Oh and to stick to the point, the vietnamese used suicide bombings too, send people holding grenades into american camps, blow them selves and some confused soldiers up.... as far as i know not many communists are muslims
chrisjohn316, labelling or categorizing someone/group has always been human's motto. We are in the day of $$, not human life. Those who advertise, claim and "defend themselves" from "terrorism" don't think that 1 million human die every year around the world from local crimes is "terrorism". and many other examples...... it doesn't end here......
I think some people are forgetting what terrorists are
sorry that almost certainly isn't terrorism.don't think that 1 million human die every year around the world from local crimes is "terrorism"
the point about terrorists is that they don't target the military they instead work by intimidating the civilian populace.
"violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience"
Its not simply about ideology its about the way they operate, terrorists are people who try and influence countries not throught politics or pwer, but by instilling terror and disrupting the everyday lives of civilians. Thats why it is perfectly justifiable to say that someone who straps themself with bombs is a terrorist and someone who orders the bombing of a school (I'm assuming it has some military significance) is not a terrorist.
I disagree ilw, simply because labeling or categorizing someone/group is not a formula or science where proven guidlines without any doubt they would mean the same to everyone. besides, I used that word in qoutation, meaning that there is no absolute to the definition of "terrorism".
I'll give u an example, in 1982 or 83, a friend of mine was on a visit to lebanon, US war ship bombed his family's home minutes before he arrived there. Killing his Mom, 2 sisters and 1 brother of 4mnths old. US claimed there were "palestinian terrorists" in that house. from my friends eyes, what is "terrorism" now and who is the "terrorist" the palastenians or the americans? assuming there were palastenians there, eventhough he only saw his family's bodies there.
ilw if an army suspected a civilian building to be a threat... such as in Iraq, Baghdad, civilian bomb shelter filled with.... well civilians got bombed, "terrorists" could say "well hey you know that Embasy had stuff thats a threat so its a legitamate target" i do not defend the actions of either side to me the bombing of civilian shelters is wrong and the bombing of thw WTC is wrong but at the end of the day
terrorism just comes down to your own views, and this pretty much proves it, the way you define it i can come up with something the same, and justify a bombing of some poor guys house,
Israel destroys entire buildings filled with civilians to target one single person, this to me is terrorism, or standing by an airport and launching rockets at tourist is terrorism but both sides say "there was a legitimate military target inside... its not a terrorist act, its war"
so eh... comes down to what you believe dont it