View Poll Results: Terrorist or Not

Voters
161. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, A terrorist Attack

    110 68.32%
  • no

    51 31.68%
Page 4 of 39 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 390

Thread: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

  1. #31
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    You know what would be a reeeeeeeally interesting poll?

    How many of us who are all worked up over this jihadist crap on the one hand have a problem with the concept of a "hate crime" on the other.

    Murder is murder. It doesn't matter if he yelled ALLAH ACKBAR or DIRKA DIRKA JIHAD or EAT AT JOES or I LOVE OBAMA.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  2. #32
    blond bombshell

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    10-19-12 @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,729

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Doesent seem like just a random mad man psychopath.I could be wrong but im guessing motivated by islamic extremism he decided to kill "infidels".
    The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

  3. #33
    blond bombshell

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    10-19-12 @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,729

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    You know what would be a reeeeeeeally interesting poll?

    How many of us who are all worked up over this jihadist crap on the one hand have a problem with the concept of a "hate crime" on the other.

    Murder is murder. It doesn't matter if he yelled ALLAH ACKBAR or DIRKA DIRKA JIHAD or EAT AT JOES or I LOVE OBAMA.
    Well of course it is.Of course the result is the same but if it is terrorism it could suggest similar attacks to follow.Motivation is important.
    The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

  4. #34
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Just because he was a "jihadist" doesn't mean he was a terrorist.
    He terrorized millions in the DC area.

    OBL 11/24/02

  5. #35
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by bhkad View Post
    Are you saying a lone nut job can't be a terrorist?

    Think John Mohammad, the DC sniper.
    Yes, lone nut jobs CAN be terrorists. The unibomber would be an example as he had a specific ideological agenda that he was attempting to push through fear by his actions.

    The sniper would not be in my mind. As of now there doesn't seem like any over whelming evidence that he was doing his killings with the outward, stated or obvious purpose to push for an ideological agenda through fear tactics.

    Simply causing people to be afraid for their lives is not "terrorism" in my mind. If that was the case every single robber could be a "Terrorist" cause I think most people are at least a little terrified if a gun is pointed at them or even if they're just being robbed.

    In general for it to be terrorism in my eyes it needs at least a number of the following...

    - Tied to some kind of group or network whose whole purpose is terrorism (eco, politico, religious, etc)

    - Done in conjunction with something (letters sent out, video left behind, message clearly shown through the actual act, etc) that shows it was done in hopes of pushing an ideological agenda of some kind through fear and intimidation

    - Done in a repeated fashion against a specific ideological target in hopes of causing problems for that target (repeatedly sending bombs to whatever company happens to be having a meeting with a CEO of one the person dislikes....repeated attacks against a number of churches in hopes of keeping people from going to church due to dislike for religion....attacking a number of government offices due to a grievance with the political party in power, etc)

    - Specifically targeting Civilian targets, generally in such a way that it is random or focused more on simply a high total through collateral damage, giving the impression of "it could be anyone anywhere"

    Doesn't have to fit into all those different things, but it generally needs a number of them for me to consider it a terrorist act. I think the word "Terrorism" gets thrown around far to much and too frequently, and far to often if they simply have "muslim" attached to them people immediately jump to that even if the exact same thing happened and he wasn't muslim it wouldn't be. Being muslim or not is not a criteria for Terrorism in my mind. There's been terrorism before muslims, there will be terrorism after muslims.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    Terrorist attack or not?
    terrorist attacks, by definition, are attacks against civilian- as opposed to military- targets.
    So, no.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    This thread prompted me to go look up the definition of terrorism... only to find that nobody can agree on exactly what it is.

    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism]Definition of terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    The best source to use is probably the legal definitions used by the U.S. government.

    United States Law Code – the law that governs the entire country – 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. (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

    (d) Definitions (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

    The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal criminal code. 18 U.S.C. §2331[25] defines terrorism as:

    …activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… 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…."
    The second definition... it seems to fit, to some extent.

    The first definition is trickier, since the shooter would have to be part of a "subnational group" or "clandestine agents", and while soldiers are not "noncombatant targets", they weren't deployed....

    For now I'm going to say "no" because there is nothing to suggest that the shooter was part of a terrorist organization, and because he attacked soldiers instead of civilians. It will probably become clearer in the future, as more information is released, whether this is really a "terrorist attack", whatever that even is.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by RightOfCenter View Post
    Still soldiers and a legitimate military target. Military personnel and equipment are always a legitimate target.
    Nope.

    Don't know what else to say.

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    I think the guy was just nuts.
    He was scared ****less of going to Afghanistan.
    Part of his fear was no doubt for his own physical comfort and safety; he was a coward.
    Part of it might have been rooted in an internal conflict he was having because of the remote possibility he might be called upon to actually enter into combat against other Muslims, possibly even have to kill them.
    That possibility is remote because of his rank and job description, although probably more likely in Afghanistan (where he was headed) than anywhere else in the world.

  10. #40
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

    Quote Originally Posted by bhkad View Post
    He terrorized millions in the DC area.
    And the Son of Sam terrorized millions in New York. Same thing, not terrorism.

Page 4 of 39 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •