4 ms·
First, there is not really such thing as a "terrorist country". Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. To be more precise, one might refer to "state sponsore
by bcg1 10y ago
First, there is not really such thing as a "terrorist country". Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. To be more precise, one might refer to "state sponsored terrorism" or something to that effect. But that is beside the point.
For context around this particular document, there appears to be the following article:
https://28pages.org/2016/04/19/exclusive-a-buried-envelope-buried-questions-your-first-look-inside-declassified-document-17/ https://28pages.org/2016/04/19/exclusive-a-buried-envelope-b...
- user_0001 10y agoTerrorism is what "they" do. We do "morally just wars". Said every side involved in any conflict sense the dawn of humanity. ISIS: morally just. The west = terrorists. And they are probably right. Our bombs do terrorise. As do the torture weopans we export to their ruling parties. and vice versa
- jfoster 10y agoSome organisations target civilians first and foremost. For me, that's the difference.
- bcg1 10y agoI agree with what you are saying, "terrorism" is a propaganda word for sure. However it also does have a specific definition; that is, using threats or violence to create a political outcome among civilians. Your comment highlights my real point though... they are not "our" bombs. Maybe they are Bush's, Cheney's, Raytheon's, Boeing's, Obama's, or Clinton's bombs... but to refer to them as "ours" groups in ordinary people, many of whom do not approve. This is why I took issue with the possibility of categorizing Saudi Arabia as a "terrorist country", and why I prefer a term such as "state sponsored terrorism".