3 ms·

Its better surmised as just anti-civilian warfare.

• maaku 13y ago
  What? No. Terrorism is the incitement of terror within a population. Waging general, all-out war does not accomplish that goal very well - the certain risk of an invading standing army is much less terrifying than the uncertain risk of unseen agents with random but deadly agendas. The goal of war is to conquer or destroy. The goal of a terrorist is to leave a social structure intact as-is, but to spread fear and uncertainty within its ranks. These are totally different purposes.
  • 001sky 13y ago
    Nothing incites terror like killing innocent people. Maybe you didn't get the memo? Picking the weakest and most vulnerable (children, women, the edlerly) and adding a does of arbitrary intentionality (apparent randomness) also helps. The word 'war', in general terms, also predates and is different than your (apparent, statist) post-modern definition.
• makomk 13y ago
  No, gnu8's definition is the correct one. For instance, recently in the UK a cell of Islamic terrorists launched a terrorist attack in which they murdered a serving British soldier. They intentionally targeted him because he was in the military and were apparently quite apologetic to the civilians who saw it. Was universally described as a terrorist attack by the media.