When is terrorism an acceptable course of action?

[dougyang]

Or is it never?

[NV Whino]

1. Never

[yewberry]

2. Never.

Of course, just calling an act terrorism doesn't make it so.

[Posteritatis]

3. This is definitely a "define your terms" sort of topic. (nt)

[gateley]

9. Agree - who's making the determination of what "terrorism" is? nt

[TransitJohn]

4. When you are occupied by a hostile foreign force. n/t

eom

[hack89]

18. I wouldn't consider that terrorism

unless you are suggesting that it justifies killing civilians instead on limiting violence to military and police forces.

[blm]

5. BushInc has been using it and funding it for decades...get them to answer you.

They're the resident experts in accepting terrorism as a tactic in this country and around the globe.

[flvegan]

6. Depends on *who* is calling *what* "terrorism"

That word has been thrown around so much it has very little definite meaning. I will say this, though...in every case, harming or threatening to harm another being is never acceptable.

[ZombieHorde]

7. I guess this depends on how we define terrorism. nt

[KansDem]

8. If by "terrorism" you mean...

the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

...then one might surmise we've been ruled by "terrorists" for quite some time.

[KittyWampus]

10. Define "terrorism".

[ixion]

11. It's never acceptable. Terrorism is a tactic, usually of last resort. In any case, it's

counter productive, no matter who sanctions it.

[rhett o rick]

13. .

[robdogbucky]

12. 1775?

September 21, 1775 at New York City, New York - On September 21, before 1:00 A.M., a fire broke out in a house near Whitehall Slip, at the tip of the island. The fire quickly spread north and west. It consumed 493 houses before it was brought under control. The British blamed the Americans of having started the fire, but no proof was ever found.

http://www.myrevolutionarywar.com/battles/1775-1783e.htm


1945?

During the final stages of World War II in 1945, the United States conducted two atomic bombings against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, the first on August 6, 1945 and the second on August 9, 1945. These two events are the only active deployments of nuclear weapons in war to date.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

[qazplm]

14. call me weird but Battlestar Galactica presented this question

when the Cylons basically subjugated the humans on a planet, human suicide bombers blew up Cylons, buildings, and of course humans died in the collateral damage.

Obviously you sympathized with the humans and thus the suicide bombers but at the same time you thought about suicide bombings in our world and usually it's pretty hard to justify/sympathize with them.

So the question becomes, if you are dominated and subjugated, are there really any rules or is it anything goes in order to regain your freedom?

I don't know the answer to that question. I don't think it's an easy answer either way. I certainly don't think Iraq qualified as a subjugation because we will be out of there after next year. But if a nation truly invades with the intent of permanently subjugating a population, then it becomes harder to think that all bets are off when national identity is threatened.

[Forkboy]

15. You first.

[hack89]

16. Never. nt

[bemildred]

17. Acceptable to whom? nt

[Xithras]

19. Against civilians? Never. Against governments?

Only when that government is denying your fundamental human rights and the government is denying you any legal avenue to enact change within that government. That does NOT mean "I tried the courts/voting booth/public opinion and lost", but is limited to "There are no elections or courts that I can air my grievances in."

Please note that I'm using the modern American definition of terrorism, which includes any kind of bombing or nonconventional warfare carried out by people who aren't members of a recognized national army. Keep in mind that under this modern definition, George Washington was a terrorist leader.

[KG]

20. one man's terrorism is another man's counterattack.