• 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
Apocalypse said:
So he wouldn't be a terrorist?
Click to expand...

I can't see us seeing him as a terrorist. We would of course need to look more into it.

If he killed the people just because they were British then I would think he was a nutter.

If he killed the people because of their political activities in Afghanistan then he would not really be killing them because of their Nationalities.

In addition to be a terrorist, he would have to have more, he would have to believe that his killing of the British people was going to cause terror and that that terror was going to result in him achieving his political objectives.

Normally people need a structure behind them in order to be able to come up with these ideas.

Hence this person appears more to be someone who has lost their mind for some reason.
 
Apocalypse said:
Is the guy from my example a terrorist?
Click to expand...

I dont know. Terrorists are nationalists, but a different branch of nationalism; islamic nationalists. Did your Afghan man kill them because they are in his country, or because they posed a threat to both his country and islamic heritage?
 
alexa said:
I can't see us seeing him as a terrorist. We would of course need to look more into it.

If he killed the people just because they were British then I would think he was a nutter.

If he killed the people because of their political activities in Afghanistan then he would not really be killing them because of their Nationalities.

In addition to be a terrorist, he would have to have more, he would have to believe that his killing of the British people was going to cause terror and that that terror was going to result in him achieving his political objectives.

Normally people need a structure behind them in order to be able to come up with these ideas.

Hence this person appears more to be someone who has lost their mind for some reason.
Click to expand...
Has lost their mind right in the middle of a British tea-club.
The likelihood is high I'm certain, but what is it that differs between this man from my example and the Mumbai shooting?
(Except of the location, casualty number, and the obvious physical data)
 
MetalGear said:
I dont know. Terrorists are nationalists, but a different branch of nationalism; islamic nationalists. Did your Afghan man kill them because they are in his country, or because they posed a threat to both his country and islamic heritage?
Click to expand...
An Afghan citizen decides to kill British nationals.
His intention was to kill British nationals, people who hold a British citizenship.

Why could he possibly choose to murder British nationals?
That should have been obvious, the question is if he, knowing his motives, is a terrorist.
 
Apocalypse said:
An Afghan citizen decides to kill British nationals.
His intention was to kill British nationals, people who hold a British citizenship.

Why could he possibly choose to murder British nationals?
That should have been obvious, the question is if he, knowing his motives, is a terrorist.
Click to expand...

You haven't answered my question. Incidentally i dont know what the hell he is thinking because im not a psychic.
Now, i could just say "well, he has a gun, he killed white people and he is brown. Therefore, he must be a terrorist". Or i could come at it from a different angle, which is what im trying to do; did your Afghan man kill them because they are in his country, or because they posed a threat to both his country and Islamic (more accurately, religious) heritage?
 
MetalGear said:
You haven't answered my question. Incidentally i dont know what the hell he is thinking because im not a psychic.
Now, i could just say "well, he has a gun, he killed white people and he is brown. Therefore, he must be a terrorist". Or i could come at it from a different angle, which is what im trying to do; did your Afghan man kill them because they are in his country, or because they posed a threat to both his country and Islamic (more accurately, religious) heritage?
Click to expand...
The guys he killed were in a British tea-club in Italy.
The British nation has troops in Afghanistan.
The Afghan immigrant to Italy has chosen to kill those civilians because he had a desire to kill British nationals, because of his opposition to the British state's policies.
 
Apocalypse said:
The guys he killed were in a British tea-club in Italy.
The British nation has troops in Afghanistan.
The Afghan immigrant to Italy has chosen to kill those civilians because he had a desire to kill British nationals, because of his opposition to the British state's policies.
Click to expand...

You still haven't answered my question. I cant give you a response. Chances are you want me to label him a terrorist because he is Afghan and therefore must be so. But i refuse submit to racist stereotypes and will ask you again.

Did his decision have something to do with the fact that the "invaders" posed a threat to his religious heritage? Did he kill these nationals in the name of protecting this religious heritage?
 
PS: A british tea-club? Lol. Sounds fun. :)
 
MetalGear said:
You still haven't answered my question. I cant give you a response. Chances are you want me to label him a terrorist because he is Afghan and therefore must be so. But i refuse submit to racist stereotypes and will ask you again.
Click to expand...
Amusing. :2razz:
Did his decision have something to do with the fact that the "invaders" posed a threat to his religious heritage? Did he kill these nationalists in the name of protecting this religious heritage?
Click to expand...
No.
He has killed those people from national causes, because he is opposing the British policies in Afghanistan.

The man might have believed he would be rewarded by Allah, but the motivation was not his religion.
 
Apocalypse said:
Amusing. :2razz:
Click to expand...

Is it? Im not laughing.

No.
He has killed those people from national causes, because he is opposing the British policies in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

If you say his motivation wasn't religion but instead a nationalist one, then i guess he is a nationalist and a murderer.
 
Other.

Any attack against a civilian population with the motivation being ideological views
 
I answered that already, he is a nationalist and a murderer.
Click to expand...
That's like answering the question "Is tomato a vegetable" with "It's a nationalist and a murderer".

Please answer the following question with either a Yes, a No or an I don't know:
Is the guy from my example a terrorist?
 
Apocalypse said:
That's like answering the question "Is tomato a vegetable" with "It's a nationalist and a murderer".

Please answer the following question with either a Yes, a No or an I don't know:
Is the guy from my example a terrorist?
Click to expand...

wtf. Your asking me if he is a terrorist and im saying he is a nationalist for his country.
Doesnt that mean no, he is not a terrorist? :confused:
 
MetalGear said:
wtf. Your asking me if he is a terrorist and im saying he is a nationalist.
Doesnt that mean no, he is not a terrorist? :confused:
Click to expand...
It would mean no in the case that all of the nationalists are not terrorists.
Else all options are open.

Anyway, can you mark the differences between this action and an action that you would perceive as terrorism?
 
Apocalypse said:
It would mean no in the case that all of the nationalists are not terrorists.
Else all options are open.
Click to expand...

Thats because all nationalists aren't terrorists.

Anyway, can you mark the differences between this action and an action that you would perceive as terrorism?
Click to expand...

Terrorism is typically associated with acts of violence in the name of religion or a political ideology that goes in hand with religious beliefs rather than racist ones like nationalist does.
If he killed those people in the name of his religion, i would single him out as a terrorist though to be honest there is no internationally accepted definition of the word, so again, i cannot fully answer your question. What do you regard terrorism as?
 
MetalGear said:
Thats because all nationalists aren't terrorists.



Terrorism is typically associated with acts of violence in the name of religion or a political ideology that goes in hand with religious beliefs rather than racist ones like nationalist does.
If he killed those people in the name of his religion, i would single him out as a terrorist though to be honest there is no internationally accepted definition of the word, so again, i cannot fully answer your question. What do you regard terrorism as?
Click to expand...
Something different.

Well I'm sufficed with your answer, you're dismissed.
 
What is terrorism? Is it not the act of instilling terror into victims and bystanders. Killing mercilessly. Creating damage either physically or mentally. Causing fear and disrupt.

You do not need to focus on a terrorist's nationality or political leaning. In my mind, if you kill (or try to kill) an innocent human being, you are a terrorist. Plain and simple.
 
Jucon said:
You do not need to focus on a terrorist's nationality or political leaning. In my mind, if you kill (or try to kill) an innocent human being, you are a terrorist. Plain and simple.
Click to expand...
So in your mind, a person that accidentally smashes his car into a tree, killing another person that was sitting next to him, is a terrorist?

And another example for a person that you would label as a terrorist is a one who shoots the lover of his wife, injuring him?

Please correct me if I have misunderstood.
 
Apocalypse said:
Check the actions above that you consider to be acts of terrorism.

[Wait for the poll to come up before posting your bullcrap]





..structure* :2razz:
Click to expand...

"Terrorism" is about motivation, not merely about the acts committed. Quite frankly, the misuse and over use of the word terrorist has diminished it's meaning almost to the point of making it useless.

The dumbing down of America continues.
 
Apocalypse said:
So in your mind, a person that accidentally smashes his car into a tree, killing another person that was sitting next to him, is a terrorist?

And another example for a person that you would label as a terrorist is a one who shoots the lover of his wife, injuring him?

Please correct me if I have misunderstood.
Click to expand...

Correction... intentionally kill/harm or try to kill/harm.

One doesn't need to be a jihadist to be considered a terrorist.

Murder is terrorism. Attempted murder is terrorism. So yes, in a broad sense your second example is terrorism, but a more appropriate label would be attempted murder.

"Terrorism is, in the most general sense, the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion." (Taken from Wikipedia)

Does that clarify?
 
In response to the poll question, "Which of the following do you perceive as terrorism?"

Deliberately shooting a person to death, motivated with his nationality.
Click to expand...
Not entirely sure what you mean. Motivated with is nationality? If you mean motivated by his or her nationality, then I would say it depends.

Being a member of a terrorist organization
Click to expand...
No, obviously, as being a member of a group is not an action, and the word "terrorism" can only be used to define an action.
Murdering a person with stones/fists, motivated with his nationality
Click to expand...
Same answer as option 1.

Bombing a foreign government's structure/a foreign army's structure, motivated with political causes
Click to expand...
No. If it is a foreign government's structure/foreign army's structure...Wait, aren't they the same thing, as an army in most cases is subordinate to the government? Or, in some few, the opposite?

But I digress.
If it is a foreign structure (as in, belonging to a country that is not the one attacking it), then bombing it would be an act of war, not terrorism. If it is bombed by a group not associated with a country (for example, a terrorist group), then it can’t be a foreign structure, because the persons attacking it aren’t a foreign power.

Terrorism, in my mind, is committing an act with the INTENT of causing terror.

In war, such acts may have the side effect of terrorizing some, but their main focus is to take out a militarily important target.
Or, at least, that’s they way it SHOULD be.

None of the above/Other(what other?)
Click to expand...
Yes.
McDonald's... I'm lovin' it.
Click to expand...
Heh.
 
The Mark said:
Not entirely sure what you mean. Motivated with is nationality? If you mean motivated by his or her nationality, then I would say it depends.
Click to expand...
Depends on what?
Terrorism, in my mind, is committing an act with the INTENT of causing terror.
Click to expand...
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?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom