SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter O'Brien who wrote (103434)7/18/2007 7:54:20 PM
From: Peter O'Brien  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 173976
 
which leads to the interesting question,

if you *respond* to terror with terror,
does that make you a "terrorist" too?

The Cold War is one example which I provided.
Although it never happened, each side was fully prepared
to wipe out the other in response.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki could possibly be viewed as
a "response" to terrorist acts by Japan (e.g.,
rape of Nanking in 1937-1938).



To: Peter O'Brien who wrote (103434)7/18/2007 8:39:26 PM
From: Steve Dietrich  Respond to of 173976
 
It's Rough Cut's definition. But how is a war where no shots were fired a terrorist war?

SD


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News