My point exactly, it may be part of it but it's not the same thing. Still you failed to answer the main question of this article: Why is this attack considered to be terrorism? It is not about war, it's about terrorism. That is what I meant when I said you guys were creating a soup out of this argument.

Yes I did, I admitted what they did was a form of terrorism. It is tactic of warfare that has been used for thousands of years. It’s only the targeting civilians part that the world has a problem with. You seem to believe that terrorist have no motive other than terrifying people. They’re at war, for about the only reason they fight wars in the Middle East, religion. How are their goals not “warfare goals”? Is their no such thing as a religious war to you? They’re using tactics that have proven over many years of warfare to be very successful, especially when fighting a superior enemy. Look at 911, a few million and 13 willing believers cost this country a trillion and counting, gave them billions in weapons and a massive urban setting to train against American soldiers. That’s how a small group can bring down a supper power. We keep playing this game and they will.

When American soldiers go after the enemy, they do not try to kill as many of them as possible, they try to stop their efforts to fight back with as little casualties as possible.

We try to minimize CIVILIAN casualties. If we had a really smart bomb that only killed combatants, we would carpet-bomb Iraq with it tomorrow and go home.

Thousands upon thousands died in WWII, many were civilians. I, personally, have never seen the use of the word "terrorism" to describe any of it. I guess it's a matter of perspective. The freedom to believe what you want to believe based on what you see. As I said before, what the point of dictionaries if people will give the word the meaning they see better fit. It seems the only good thing school have now a days is that they are good daycares to let the parents work, cause education seems to be almost non existant.

I’m quoting here,
“It is no accident that there is no agreed definition of terrorism, since the word is so subjective as to be devoid of any inherent meaning. At the same time, the word is extremely dangerous, because people tend to believe that it does have meaning, and they use and abuse it by applying it to whatever they hate as a way of avoiding rational thought and discussion and, frequently, excusing their own illegal and immoral behavior”.
“Perhaps the only honest and globally workable definition of "terrorism" is an explicitly subjective one - "violence that I don't support." Anyone who reads both the Western and Arab press cannot help noticing that the Western press routinely characterizes as "terrorism" virtually all Palestinian violence against Israelis (even against Israeli occupation forces within Palestine), while the Arab press routinely characterizes as "terrorism" virtually all Israeli violence against Palestinians. Only such a formulation would accommodate both characterizations, as well as most others”.

This is my point; you want to simplify a word that is by no means simple. What constitutes a terrorist act is very subjective. Much of what of what was done by all sides in WW2 was and should be considered terrorism by most definitions. Much of the world considered dropping the most terrifying weapon ever created by man on a defeated civilian population an act of terrorism. Why were kamikaze attacks not referred to as terrorism? You just refuse to see this from any other perspective.

The terrorism that our generation has become unwittingly familiar with and the only reason that there is a global war on terror now is because it targets civilians.

You're welcome. Look, I know I came off a bit too strong there. It just ticks me off when people give me the impression that they are trying to make Americans seem as if we somehow are just as bad as they are. Sure, we are not angels here, I won't deny that. But even with people like those in the White House, Congress and the Senate we are still far from being anything like a terrorist. The fact that our soldiers in Iraq are dying because we are fighting by the rules says it all. This is what I got from you're point of view.

You know this; if you point out any simularities between us and them you’re saying were just as bad as them, is just tired, stupid crap.

Actually, besides the civilian part, they also hate the nature in which a terrorist attack is done. Terrorist don't just walk up to the enemy like in war, point their weapons and start shooting. They use sneaky, cowardly, behind the enemies back attacks. Sure you can say we have done this with groups like the Navy Seals, but again I state that missions like these were not with terrorist intentions, they were not seeking to kill as many as possible but to deal a blow to the enemy by making it harder for them to fight back. Terrorist on the other hand want to cause mental damage, they don't care if you are civilian or military. Sure civilian is a better target but what they really look for is what hurts the most at the moment and right now considering that a civilian target is 10 thousand times easier to attack why attack a military target inside the US? Simple, if they can get in there and cause as much damage as possible, they can prove to us that even a military base is vulnerable in this country and that would prove that our President has not made this country safer. The end results are what make war and terrorism different. As far as I'm concerned terrorism is just a cowardly way to get what you want.



We try to minimize all casualties, remember the rules of engagement, we don't shoot first. We would rather have the enemy surrender than fight to the death. Again, it is our mission to take away their ability to fight not their lives. It just so happens that sometimes we have no choice. SWAT teams are trained to shoot those who are pointing guns at them. Even if a criminal or enemy they will not shoot an unarmed man unless he posses a threat to their lives. This is the reason we are in such bad shape in Iraq.



I agree here. People define it based on whats more convenient for them. Talk about something being so wrong. Maybe the word terrorism should not be used period.



You're confusing me, are you saying that terrorism did not target civilians before? Are what you are trying to say that it's only important now because it's happening to us, still to this date?



That's why we have the right to different opinions. You may think this kind of thinking is crap, but I think it's legit. I'm not a terrorist, our soldiers are not terrorist and no matter how much you want to hate the current administration and no matter how idiotic they can be, they are no where near being terrorist. They just money hungry. Any time I feel that somehow we are being compared to terrorism like those we are familiar with today I will have something to say about it, so this may be one time where you may have to deal with crap whether you like it or not.

and i never said they were. maybe try thinking about it this way...that maybe, just maybe the rhetoric of "they hate us for our freedom" is bullsh*t. maybe the reasons for the conflicts are a little deeper than the neocon spin machine would like us to think.

now i'm not saying that we "caused" 9/11 or anything of the sort. but from THEIR PERSPECTIVE all we have done since WWII was

1) took their land and declared it the property of the jewish religion as a "make up" for all the injustice they got in europe. if i were in their shoes and foreigners came in and stronghanded a major area of land from them i might be a little resentful.

2) in 1953, 5 years after we took palestine and created israel, we went into iran and propped up the Shah, who brutalized the people with our blessing and help until the messy revolt in the late 70's.

3) stuck military bases on their holy land when they have never attacked us.

4) exploited them for their oil while backing dictators throughout the region who squelched any alternative viewpoints.

and so on...i'm not even gonna touch on the crusades or other "injustices" we have committed, from their perspective.

now, just like in iraq,,,what is done is done, and can't be undone. but ignoring the history of our imperialism and exploitation of the region with little or no regard to human rights or anything except keeping the resources flowing from the region might cause a little resentment, and is just dumb in my opinion. i want ot see us begin to outsmart these guys, cause we're not gonna "out-tough" them on their home turf...that's just a fool's errand, imho.

face it...we're not going to "genocide" our way out of this. we are not going to "catch terrorism in a bag" or anything of the sort. anyone who thinks we can "war" our way out of this or even that the military should be a primary force in this ideological conflict is a fool, in my mind. the military can play a role, but not in the way we have badly misused them for the past 5 years or so.

relations with the nations and people of the middle east are going to take years, if not a generation or 2 (or 3) to repair if we started today. that's just a fact. and yeah, some of those folks will never stop hating us, they have gone past teh point of return on that. and we'll have to deal with them as situations arise. but military occupation that is so much more about our interests than theirs is only adding to the problem.

we put all our energies into continuing the iraq war, with no end in sight, while our actual enemy, the one who attacked us, osama and al qaeda, are enjoying safe haven in pakistan...a country with very real nuclear weapons and a significant radicalized population. a country that is the home to the king of "guys who give technology to terrorists", AQ Kahn.

this overextended, mistake in the 1st place war has done nothing but make america weaker...which is exactly what they want.

now, we're gonna be in that region in some capacity for some time. but the one place we should not be is on the streets, with a target on our back, refereeing a civil war where we have no clue who is on which of the many sides of the conflict. that only weakens us, and emboldens them.

we can continue to fight al queda interests, which are minor in iraq without being in combat,,,which hasn't worked, ever.

whichever paths we choose down the road, it will be messy. but overextending our military abroad and making us weaker at home as a result is hardly a good plan. it might bruise an ego or 2 if we withdraw from refereeing a civil war, but i could care less about that. what is more important is our long term security, which is being compromised by a mistake of a war that is costing us 100's of billions of dollars annually, and unlike WWII, is being financed in the markets, vs. a shared sacrifice at home. a problem that will haunt our grandchildren's children.

that's enough rambin for now...take care:)

Well just to get one thing straight, this was not to you. I said my comment to stubbyfinger. But since you had an opinion I might as well respond to it.

Maybe they are a little deeper, and maybe they are not. Last I check you were no expert on Muslim thinking so if you want to base your opinion on a hypotesis be my guest but you are no more sure of why they do what they do than anyone on this site is. Keep in mind that the spin machine spins both ways and the Democrats are no saints. When it comes to politics you either call them all a bunch of selfish jerks or great role models, there are no angels in politics.



And so you think they are within their rights to do what they do because this is how they see it? So why do you condemn what this country does when we do what we do cause we think, based on how WE see things, we are doing the right thing? You can't have your cake and eat it too Sean. Call it lowering ourselves to their level if you want, but in a situation where survival is the goal, one sometimes must fight fire with fire and though we don't believe in fighting the way our current enemy does, there may be a time when we will find ourselves with no other choice just like they seem to find themselves today.

Keep in mind, here you are excusing the actions of a group of people because they somehow feel they got the short end of the stick, the same group of people who keep get along with their own kind. The same group of people who use the same terror tactics on their own race. The same kind of people who threaten to mass murder their own people because some of them chose to follow different faith. I'm sorry Sean, but just like the legal system here in the US, you defend the ones commiting the crimes and condemn those with good intentions. Or at least do not resort to extinction of an entire race to get a point across. We may not have been the best role models in the past, but times have changed and so have we. WE still have a lot to learn but we are at the least several hundred years ahead when it comes to being closer to be a better society than they are at this moment.



OK, you need to make up your mind. You complain that we are the bad guys here yet you want us to win? You're starting to sound like Col gene again, not being able to follow you're own line of thinking. And lets see if you are more sure of what you believe in, all this use of words like "might" and "maybe" tells me, yet again, that you base your opinion on a hypotesis rather than facts. This either cause resentment or it didn't. You can't just go and accuse you're wife (if you're married) of being a whore just because you "think" she "might" be cheating on you. Again you keep excusing their actions just because it "seems" they "might" have the right to do so. See how the use of these words makes a situation questionable? It's probably why you can barely (please forcus on the word barely) get anyone on this site to agree with you on anything.



You make it sound easy. You can not make peace with people who believe that those who do not follow their ways are infidels and only their deaths with satisfy them. I personally see no hope in creating any kind of relationship with people who believe in shooting first diplomacy later, if any. I don't even trust the current Iraqi Gov't I'm sad to say. We are not just facing a people who are more passionate about giving their lives for what they believe in, they actually think that they are better off dead if their mission is a success. I'm not one to suggest that the erradication of the entire Islamic population is the only solution, apart from impossible it is inmoral and inhumane, but love, compassion, open arms, understanding and care will never overpower their mission in life. Eventually we will be forced to fight fire with fire. As I have said before we may separate ourselves from the animal kingdom because of our ability to think, but we still maintain our survial instincts as a back-up and time and time again history shows that humans always tend to go back to those instincts when their lives are on the line, hence all the wars that have been fought thru out the ages. Be it American, British, German, Muslim, Chinese, etc., we all have a history of survival at all cost. When the going gets tough, throw the book at the enemy is what I say.

and the hardcore center of that movement, no we won't make peace with them. but unless you believe that they "all are like that" you have to realize that just like with the cold war and other great conflicts in history, the vast majority of people have no interest in killing anyone for anything.

we won the cold war because of blue jeans, mcdonalds and MTV. not because of the military. And where Reagan and Gorbachav used the realities on the ground to their collective advantages, the people of the USSR are more responsible for ending the cold war than anyone. as they got sick and tired of waiting in long lines for basic necessities, the world started to flatten. We entered the information age. It simply wasn't as easy to oppress the people. and as the unrest inside the USSR began to spill out, as news of supershopping centers with discounted prices, cheap tasty food and entertainment on demand spilled in.

so, if you think most of the arab world wants goods and services in a convenient manner like the rest of the world then we better change our course dramatically.

if you believe that most of em want us dead,,,then send in the carpet bombers.

but in either case, our current path is simply a road to disaster. it's macho without the mojo.

one last note...please stop trying to paint me as "wanting them to win" or any crap like that. i've made it clear who's side i'm on. but i don't do it with blinders on. trying to paint our nation into sainthood will never do anyone a bit of good. you can only improve when you acknowledge the flaw. but flaws don't damn us. recognizing and minimizing them is our challenge going forward if yyou look at it with a sober mind.

Please show where I said all of them, I'm not too fond of those who put words in my mouth. I'm not ignorant to the concept that they are all alike. And I would like to know how exactly is it that you know what the vast majority wants? Again you are having illusions that you speak for the vasy majority of people like Col gene does.



That doesn't matter cause I don't know what most arabs want. I only know that some do not like us and those who are not voicing themselves are not condemming them either.



Been saying it for some time now. You may be thinking I don't care for human life, you couldn't be any more wrong. Because I care is the reason why I think a strong hand is sometimes needed from the begining. That shock and awe so much mentioned when we first started this war was more of a surprise than shock. Sure, we may have scared a few Iraqi soldiers into giving up, but all we really did was show them how good we are at bluffing. Right then and there they understood that we weren't gonna really blast them back before the stone age. We didn't have the balls then for fear of criticism that we got anyways.



We will have to agree on this one.



Of course you don't do it with blinders. You do just find closing your eyes. THis is not about you wanting them to win, it's about wanting us to lose. You want the current administration to screw up so bad, even if it puts innocent lives at stake, just so you can them go around screaming murder. You're ideals are not to better this country, it's a political thing. You're question alone says it all. You question why the administration is treating this incident as a terrorist attack, not because you're championing that cause of the American people or the "innocent Muslims, this is just for political bashing and finger pointing.



For a person claiming not to have blinders you really do close your eyes everytime you read someone elses opinion. From my own words:





Not once have I said we were innocent of having done things wrong before. But at the least we try to value things while trying to solve problems. Keep in mind we are fighting a war by the rules against an enemy with no honor, at least not from OUR POINT OF VIEW. The Muslim race has existed for thousands of years before the US was formed yet we at least try to be as humane as possible with every action we take. We try to demand equality in a time were racism, financial status and gender differences are still surviving in our society though in medium to low quantities. Laws are constantly passed to help those can't help themselves. Countless programs are created to help the less fortunate. Starvation in this country is a matter of laziness than unavailability. The day I see anything like this going on in places like Iraq, where women can walk without fear of being stoned, where people can worship the God of their chosing without having death threats nocking at their doors, where is child is being tought that 2+2=4 as oppose to being told that infidels must die cause their God says so; when I see things like this happening then I can go on not worrying about someone wanting me dead cause they fear my lifestyle disrupts their culture.

it all comes down to the fact that you fear them and I don't.

Sean,
The little difference is simple. We declared our intentions to continue the war with Iraq as was allowed in the UN mandates. The Gulf war was never resolved, the cease fire was in effect but the war had not ended. Just like the Korean war, we are in a cease fire situation with North Korea, the war has not ended because no one has surrendered yet. When I was still in the service I remember we get five to ten servicemen killed each year from snipers over the last fifty years. Back to the point. We were at war with Iraq prior to our invasion. Both sides have uniformed troops and the battle has always been between the troops rather than attacking the civilians as the main target. AQ went after military targets first but had no real success until they went after the civilians on 9/11 it also announced their downfall.

You're damn right I do. I don't want to die a senseless death just because they mad and their precious God told them to kill me so they can have a ton of virgins when they die. At least I'm man enough to admit my fear, my fear makes me stronger, it makes me more aware, it gives my family more security. Fearing means I care, it means I pay attention. Because we did not fear the enemy, we did not pay attention to their movements. We felt invulnerable, untouchable, almighty; until the Twin Towers fell. They fell because we were too confident.

My fear does not make me a coward as you tried to portray in this single sentence. My fear gives me strength, it empowers me. Here is the reality: It all comes down to them before us. In the end I would give my life for my family, my country; but I would do what I can to take them down before me. Terrorism is a cowards tactic, a my-way-or-the-highway tactic, an inhumane tactic.

so , with you, their mission is complete.




no, because we did not RESPECT our enemy, we got hit. there's a big difference.

This is where you are wrong. This is were your understanding of people is limited. The type of fear an enemy such as a terrorist searches for is those who will submit to them, who will give up and back off. That is not the fear I have. I fear for my life, my families life, my friends and fellow Americans. This fear allows me to face the enemy head on, it does not make me hide and give up. If anything their terrorist tactics have actually backfired on them. They did not get the results they were seeking. Instead they only gave me and people like me a greater purpose to fight back.

One thing you can be sure about me, put my families life in danger and you will have to face a man who's strenght, honor, valor, bravery and commitment feed and grow from this type of fear. Mission complete? Not if their mission was to piss off a sleeping giant. Sometimes the most logical course isn't always the right course.

Respect is earned, not given. Learn that.

and the fact that they were the inhabitants of that region for 1000's of years earns that respect.

and charles...i suggest you retract those comments on the other thread.

We have a land of Methuselahs? WOW! Where is that fountain of Youth!

I'm sorry, where do you live again? I mean if you live here in the US then you're more of a hypocrit than anyone I have met on this site. Keeping in mind that we live on a piece of land we took from the native Indians. I don't see them bringing jihad on to us.

Do you speak of the one with the military wife? I don't take back words I post unless I find myself wrong. It's your site, remove it if you want.

Sean,
The reason we were attacked was because Saudi Arabia disrespected AQ during the Gulf War. When Iraq invaded Kuwait AQ volunteered to fight Iraq and kick them out of Kuwait. Saud said thanks but we would rather have the Americans come in and protect us than you. Huge insult but smart thinking. That was when we started to get serious attacks from AQ because the Saudi’s were attacked and then paid AQ off leaving only us to take the hits. We did not disrespect them the leader of Saudi Arabia disrespected them. Because we chose to help an Arab nation that was attacked by an Arab nation we were in the wrong in their eyes. It was then that AQ set its sights on us, before that they were our friends. We supported them against the Soviets in Afghanistan, yet the Taliban and a small splinter group called Al Qaeda felt they needed to destroy us. Two groups helped by us in their struggle against the Soviets. (A war started by Mr. Carter to deflect his weakness in Iran.)
Are you suggesting that we as a nation watching another nation mug a third nation that we have national interests in sit back and let it happen even when we were asked to help?

Our national mistake was not going after AQ the minute they started attacking us directly. That would be Somalia and the black hawk down situation. If I remember correctly that was their first attack on us. Where was our disrespect of the people or a nation. The UN ordered us to arrest the Somali war lord not the US. President Bush refused because we went in to provide food and protection of civilians not in the civil war nothing more, President Clinton was conned into turning the humanitarian mission into a police action which got the ball rolling and the attacks on us started. Did AQ attack the UN? No they attacked us. One helicopter, one ship, and two embassies later we get hit at home and people wonder what we did to deserve the attacks on 9/11, the answer is nothing. No good deed goes unpunished. The only thing we have done to anger the Arab world is our steadfast support of Israel a nation created by the UN not the United States.
Please Sean, tell me what we did to disrespect them?

War - a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation; warfare, as by land, sea, or air

Terrorism - the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes

Dont you see the bias even in these two difinitions that you use?

if you go by that then there is really no purpose for "war" while Terrorism's is "political". and as if "by force of arms" is not a violent action.

all this discussion about this topic is going nowhere since it really belongs to "the mind of the beholder" kind of definition. Our "Terrorist" is their "Freedom Fighter" and vice versa. We, the USA called Alqaeda "Freedom Fighters" when they were fighting the USSR using the same methods they are now using against us. Now, we call them "Terrorists". What changed? nothing on their part, it is just before, they were fighting on our side, now they are fighting us. that is what changed.

War and Terrorism are the same and both use different tactics and weapons depending on the battle (last summer, Hammas, an organization we call terrorist , fought Israel's forces in a battle that lasted about a month, does that change our description of them?) and both have political goals.

they have command strutures and operational , supply, finance and PR units not much different from any army. We actually call them by their ranks like deputy, strategist, commander,... etc.

Using "Dictionaries" for this kind of words is really misleading. It depends who is writing the dictionary.

That is why there is no universal definition for "Terrorism" because it depends on who is talking and who is fighting whom.

When you don’t separate combatants from non-combatants your saying there’s no living on the same planet as you, and we want all of you to die

isnt that what we did in Alhadetha and many other situations in Iraq?

war is Ugly, terrible and have much more innocent victims than combatants. So is Terrorism.

that is why no one in his right mind should start either unless it is a MUST in order to defend your country against real and imminant danger.

if this act that was to be done by the Six was not a terrorist act, then what was it?

simple, it is part of "their " war against us.

The problem here is that you are discussing this as if it is an isolated incident not part of their strategy. that is the kind of "Army" they can assemble, small or large groups acting to achieve the same goal using whatever weapons they can get.

a little resentment

comon now. you used this word few times. with all what you said, is it really "little". If that happens to you, you really would be a "little" resentful? i would be furious. and that is what i believe they feel.

Last I check you were no expert on Muslim thinking so if you want to base your opinion on a hypotesis be my guest but you are no more sure of why they do what they do than anyone on this site is.

Dont be soooo sure. I can assure you what he said is 100% correct. If you live with them and talk to the people in the streets you will reach that same conclusion.

However, do you really HAVE to go there and live to understand this? what Sean said is 100% accurate, i dont think anyone will disagree with what we did and still do to these people and to the region in general, all you have to do is put yourself in their position. what would YOU do? or do you think they are ragheads and backward as some here think? even if they are that, they still will defend their turf. even animals do that.

Let's wake up and behave in a less arrogant barbaric way. it is disgusting that we think we are the only people on earth who have the right to defend our land while others' turf is for us to take and use, by force if necessary.

while arrogant is a good descriptive word, imho...i can't go with barbaric. our policies may have been reckless, naive, careless, and again, arrogant...but i don't think many of those policies were of the intention of being barbaric so much as they were about greed and power and that lust lead to a certain "laise faire" attiude towards the mid east in general.

when people start treating the globe like a chess board...look out.

Thank you. It's nice to see that some people can still actually think before they post. This is one of the things I find most disgusting about some peoples opinions about the US and the war in Iraq. We are not barbarians, sure money is one if not the main driving force in almost everything we do but I just can't stand, no, I hate it when people portray us as some kind of monster that goes around killing without out a care, that we just get on our powerful ships and sail towards an unsuspecting, innocent country and drop every bomb we can find in storage and kill anything that moves without missing a beat on what goes on in American Idol.

Our guys are dying, not just because we did not think our strategy thru, but because we are trying to be the better man and follow a set of imaginary rules. Somehow we convinced ourselves that we can stop an enemy while preserving life at the same time. We dream of bullets that can weave around children playing soccer and hit that 1 guy in the crowd with the bomb strapped to his chest. We dream of enemies that will fight in isolated areas so that innocent people don't get hurt or die. We dream of defeating an enemy that will stand in line (like they do in Jr basketball and baseball games) and shake the hand of those who beat them. But we all know that this is all nothing but dreams, situations that may be possible in a perfect world.

If there is one thing I have learned in life (it being 100% proven by my daily experiences for more than 20 years) is that good guys always finish last. Bon Jovi says in his song "BLaze of Glory" "They say you're born in sin, well at least they gave me something I didn't have to steal or have to win". It seems that he can add "guilty till proven innocent" to those lyrics. Cause that is how the average person here in the US sees everyone, at least from personal experience.