Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (25013)	4/13/2002 11:07:07 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

John, I have a simple definition: attempting to achieve political ends by creating terror in a civilian population. A campaign of bombing random civilians certainly qualifies by this definition. If you have a different definition, please give it. No, terrorism is a term that's so misused by the Bushies I try not to use it. Given this definition, then to take us back to that earlier conversation, Sherman's march through the south qualifies, the US bombing of Dresden qualifies, and the US bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki. The intent in each of those cases was to terrorize civilian populations as way to force a surrender. I'm trying to think my way to a more contextualized (I know, I use the word too much) way of thinking about it. Falk's answer was a step, though I'm not too satisfied with it. And what about the Red Tent?