Terrorism countries or groups what the different ?

[Jayhawker Soule]

To us, they are targeting civilians. To them, they are targeting enemy combatants. The terms are subjective, ...

That is a disgusting and irresponsible assertion.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Hiroshima was considered an important army depot and Nagasaki held importance as it produced ships, military equipment and the like.

Considered military like many areas in America that were building ships, airplanes, tanks, and other things for the American war effort were considered military.

That is a disgusting and irresponsible assertion.

It's how it works though. Who is an ally and who is an enemy only depends on which side you ask.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's how it works though.

So, for you, the only difference between attacking a military tarket and attacking a school bus or or a mosque is one's point of view? That's a pretty despicable moral relativism.

 

[Flankerl]

don't you see the movie of "pearl harbor" the japoness attacked the navy of US (they did not attack civilians ) , that will assembel in Hawai , to attack Japan

Ah of course the japanese navy attacked pearl harbor because the US was about to attack Japan.

Must have been a huge coincidence that Japan started to invade whole far east asia almost the same time.


Coincidences are fun.

 

[England my lionheart]

ah what is the best calculator ?

IMO it's the brain.

i don't know but i am sure that the innocents that killed by western armies and Israel army are more .than what groups of terorist killed .

Of course,but then Al Qaeda didn't fight in WW1&2.

there is static about that .
the different that the media called the killing the innocent by western armies just error of war , there is cheap soul and high soul , that realy contradiction

Lets see the stats then and lets see you decide who is the enemy combatant in this crowd.

the west help terrosites in syria , as they helped it in afganistane against Rusia before !!!

I think you are being a little naive here,Iran have supported Hamas for years as has Syria before this civil war,seeing as the Muslim Brotherhood have got the reins in Egypt they do too.

then you (the west) blame the Muslims that they are terroristes and killers .

Only the guilty though,example,Al Qaeda send a suicide bomber to inflict some indescriminate damage on some civilians in Pakistan,i surely blame them just as i would blame the IRA for their attacks on civilians,BTW my names not west

 

[PMderry]

Islamic terrorists could actually do what Islam tells them and fight in person. Casualty death isn't allowed in our religion, yet thats all that terrorists do. 9/11 was 100% casualty deaths. Suicide bombings are casualty deaths.

Islam teaches us that, during war, a Muslim should fight face to face with their enemy and kill that enemy alone. Blowing oneself up and killing an entire room full of people is a great sin.

So yeah, I see where you would be mad at the US military for what they do overseas, but you should be equally (if not MORE) mad at the Muslims who disrespect Islam to the largest extreme and make Islam look like an incredibly violent religion. I expect Muslims to follow God's law and be upstanding people, and then I watch the news and want to bang my head against a wall. I am deeply ashamed at the state of the Ummah today. Before criticing others, we should be fixing ourselves.

So, for you, the only difference between attacking a military tarket and attacking a school bus or or a mosque is one's point of view? That's a pretty despicable moral relativism.

Its not pretty, but it's true. Palestinian terrorists have blown up school buses full of Israeli kids. From THEIR point of view, it's justified. Why else would they do it? Did they wake up one morning and say "I think, for absolutely no good reason, I'm going to blow up a bus full of Israeli kids." No. Theres a motive. Theres a reason. Thats not the same thing as saying it's right. It's not right. Never is killing a bus full of children right. Ever. Unless the kids on the bus are zombies. But the point is that the terrorists who did that felt that it was justified


Terrorism is relative. Rarely do people commit terrorist acts for something that they DONT believe in. To the person commiting the act, they are in the right. THey arent the terrorist, in their own minds. It depends on which side of the fence you are on.

Just watched The Others last night and was reminded of a line.


Nicholas: Where do soldiers go when they die in war?
Grace: depends on whether they fought on the side of the goodies or the baddies
Nicholas: How do we know who the goodies and the baddies are?


It's a kid asking a very important question. How do we know which side are the "goodies" and which side are the "baddies"? It depends which country you belong to. Which side you are on.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Palestinian terrorists have blown up school buses full of Israeli kids. From THEIR point of view, it's justified.

That has absolutely zero relevance. At issue is whether or not there is a meaningful and recognizable distinction between the strategy of inducing terror by wanton attacks on civilian targets and other forms of warfare. "Terrorism is in the eye of the beholder" is irresponsible garbage.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So, for you, the only difference between attacking a military tarket and attacking a school bus or or a mosque is one's point of view? That's a pretty despicable moral relativism.

Morals are relative. It's not my fault. I find attacking civilians despicable, but the people doing the attacks don't.

 

[Godobeyer]

Ah of course the japanese navy attacked pearl harbor because the US was about to attack Japan.

maybe this true (assembling to attack )

Must have been a huge coincidence that Japan started to invade whole far east asia almost the same time.

what about the civilain in asia that killed in Veitnam , and afghanistan and Iraq ?

US had bad registered memories in Asia too , (after WWE 2 )

Coincidences are fun.

that's true