3 ms·
Yes, some definitions are crappy. Do we have a word for "imperialist government uses violence against people to achieve political goals"? Because "it's not te
by Dudeman112 5y ago
Yes, some definitions are crappy.
Do we have a word for "imperialist government uses violence against people to achieve political goals"?
Because "it's not terrorism because it's a state" is always gonna stink of trying to dodge the topic on a technicality.
- Sebb767 5y ago> Do we have a word for "imperialist government uses violence against people to achieve political goals"? Yes, we call this "war". > Because "it's not terrorism because it's a state" is always gonna stink of trying to dodge the topic on a technicality. No, it's not. Nobody is trying to dogde the bad aspects of the word, it's just that terrorism specifically is, by definition, not from a state.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jdavis703 5y agoThis is either war or war crimes depending on what exactly happened. There seems to be a trend of calling every terrifying event “terrorism.” People sometimes colloquially refer to even non-political mass shootings as terrorism. I believe it’s important to separate different types of mass violence. For example a gang-related mass shooting might be de-escalated by a mediator engaging the belligerents, whereas a war crime should be sent to international criminal court and a terrorist should be dealt with in a manner to minimize the earned media attention.
- Dudeman112 5y ago>This is either war or war crimes depending on what exactly happened. Huh. Do we call operation condor a war crime? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor