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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (2515)	7/29/2005 12:29:34 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542104

"asymmetrical warfare that coerces the prevailing democratic authority into acceding to demands via violence against innocent citizens?." I think in general it is asymmetrical, but that does not appear to be a consistent requirement across all definitions. I can imagine two competing factions in a civil war engaging in terrorism against each other. I don't know why there needs to be a democratic authority. Terrorism can be committed against any type of government, or a population belonging to any type of government (as far as I can see). I don't know how you determine "innocence"- but a less loaded word would probably be "civilians". Not all definitions even include that restriction- since an act of terrorism could involve blowing up an army barracks (at least that would seem to fit under some of the less restrictive definitions, and I think most people in this country would call it terrorism if Osama blew up an army barracks).