• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Terrorism

Which of the following do you perceive as terrorism?

  • Deliberately shooting a person to death, motivated with his nationality

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • Being a member of a terrorist organization

    Votes: 15 51.7%

  • Murdering a person with stones/fists, motivated with his nationality

    Votes: 9 31.0%

  • Bombing a foreign government's stracture/a foreign army's structure, motivated with political causes

    Votes: 16 55.2%

  • None of the above/Other(what other?)

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • McDonald's... I'm lovin' it.

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • Total voters
    29
MetalGear said:
Oh no, i must insist. Whats your definition of a terrorist?
Click to expand...

school children in Hebron throwing stones at a bus that accidentally came into their area after they had been involved in this

Likud MKs to PM: Don?t capitulate

He started this thread to try and get some ideas to justify his position.
 
alexa said:
school children in Hebron throwing stones at a bus that accidentally came into their area after they had been involved in this

Likud MKs to PM: Don?t capitulate

He started this thread to try and get some ideas to justify his position.
Click to expand...
Someone seems to be furious. :2razz:

That thread was only one of the reasons, really.
 
All of the acts mentioned could be acts of terrorism, but they are not always so. This is why I voted 'other'.

In general, terrorism is the effort to create 'terror' or fear in a civilian population that is opposed to your own agenda. It is for this reason that I do not generally consider any attacks on military targets to be terrorism. I would be much more likely to consider these to be acts of war, and whatever organization that perpetrated the acts to be inviting war from the government controlling their target.
 
Apocalypse said:
Someone seems to be furious. :2razz:

That thread was only one of the reasons, really.
Click to expand...


Just answering where you appear not to have had the guts to. You opened this thread when you were making the allegation that the children who are given a minor mention at the bottom of the above article but full mention without any of the background in the article you produced.

Was it not a bit dishonest not to suggest stone throwing school children as another choice for the definition of terrorism as that was the one you have been declaring for the past 3 days.

Now I have better things to do. I am done with you.
 
alexa said:
Just answering where you appear not to have had the guts to. You opened this thread when you were making the allegation that the children who are given a minor mention at the bottom of the above article but full mention without any of the background in the article you produced.

Was it not a bit dishonest not to suggest stone throwing school children as another choice for the definition of terrorism as that was the one you have been declaring for the past 3 days.

Now I have better things to do. I am done with you.
Click to expand...
Wrong as usual alexa, this thread was opened to gather and understand different views by different posters on the definition of terrorism by stating 4 designed sentences and asking the poster how he perceives the action in each of the sentences.

As I already said, the thread you're referring to was only one of the reasons.
That you wish to make it into your personal grudge against me for pointing out the insane immorality that exists in your political positions is understandable, but beyond that I do not see a need nor a reason to respond to your continued allegations.

Now you are free to do as you say, walk away.
 
Your signature is naive and pretentious. Remove the line "Death to....". Its very uncivil and displays clear lack of knowledge.
 
To me, terrorism must accompany the political message that, "We did this because you are doing something we are against. If you don't stop doing it, we will continue to bring harm upon you and anyone associated with you."

And, legally speaking, it is out of the confines of declared war, although in my personal view war is also terrorizing to non-combatants that suffer under it.
 
Orion said:
To me, terrorism must accompany the political message that, "We did this because you are doing something we are against. If you don't stop doing it, we will continue to bring harm upon you and anyone associated with you."
Click to expand...
So if I understand your position correctly, you believe that terrorism is an attack on non-combatants that is motivated by political causes?
 
Deliberately shooting a person to death, motivated with his nationality
Click to expand...

This is called homicide/murder. I do not believe in the concept of hate crimes. All crimes of violence are, in essence, hate crimes.

Being a member of a terrorist organization
Click to expand...

Being a member of a terrorist organization does not make one a terrorist. It is committing an act of terror that makes one a terrorist.

Murdering a person with stones/fists, motivated with his nationality
Click to expand...

Also homicide, see above.

Bombing a foreign government's stracture/a foreign army's structure, motivated with political causes
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, this would be called insurrection, not terrorism. Terrorism is committing an act directed at civilians.

McDonald's... I'm lovin' it.
Click to expand...

This is known as suicide by fat.
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
So if I understand your position correctly, you believe that terrorism is an attack on non-combatants that is motivated by political causes?
Click to expand...

And if the countries involved are not at war; otherwise, to me, it's just part of standard war strategy.
 
Orion said:
And if the countries involved are not at war; otherwise, to me, it's just part of standard war strategy.
Click to expand...
Oh, but what about a conflict between a state and an organization?
 
Apocalypse said:
Oh, but what about a conflict between a state and an organization?
Click to expand...

That's true, but with a conflict like what's happening in the Middle East, it's hard to rule out state involvement in terrorist groups.
 
Apocalypse said:
Depends on what?
Click to expand...
It seems to me that someone may commit an act of terrorism solely or partially because of their target's nationality.
But simply the act of murder, even if motivated by the targets nationality or race, is not necessarily terrorism.

In most cases, it would simply be murder, motivated by nationality or race.

In my mind, only if said act was performed with intent to cause terror among similar individuals would it be terrorism.

Apocalypse said:
Yes, that's a definition that most would agree on I'm certain but there are many other definitions to the act.
Is that the only one you follow?
Click to expand...
Well, I will further define it, but in general, yes...

Terrorism is usually committed with a political goal in mind, using the terror created to push whatever your target group is towards actions you desire.

But that is not always the case - I think it possible that a terroristic act might be committed with no political motivation in mind.
Of course, that depends on how you define "political" and "motivation".
Some might consider hatred and a desire to harm a specific nationality as a political stance.

Regarding terrorism targeting civilians:

I think that restricting the definition of "terrorism" solely to attacks directed against civilians (not to mention defining the term "civilian" in the first place) is to stringent a definition.

Simply because the target of a terroristic act is a military or other "non-civilian" person does not eliminate the intent to cause terror.
For example, if terrorists intended to kill (because they were Jewish)several Jewish US military members by some means, perhaps blowing up their vehicles.
If successful, and if it were known after the fact that these terrorists were targeting Jewish persons because they were Jewish, would the fact that the attack only killed Jewish military persons reduce the terror factor among non-military Jews by much, if any?

Or apply any other group that people are lumped into, same deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom