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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (97642)	1/30/2005 5:10:10 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793752

"Murdered" is probably the word you were looking for. It's really the only word you'd really need to describe what happened to the people who were killed by terrorists on 9/11, and to the American soldiers who have been killed by terrorists in Iraq, as well. "Murder" has the connotation of illegality, and wrongness. "War" doesn't have that same connotation, at least, not to me. Nation-states start "wars" because they feel justified in doing so for political reasons, reasons of state. Potential nation-states start revolutions for political reasons, reasons of state. I would not concede that Al Qaeda was a nation-state, or a potential nation-state, that had any right to start a "war". Nor would I elevate a cowardly, dastardly act of terrorism, of sabotage, to the status of an act of "war." That gives it more dignity than it deserves. "Terrorism" is not war. Anti-terrorism isn't really war, either.