Can You Define Terrorism?
Straying from the poetry for a jaunt in politics.
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
College life has presented me with a few wonderful courses, one of which is "International Relations and Politics" This class has a required text based on the history, motivations, definitions and actions of terrorists and terrorism. I'm citing it down in the bottom, but I'd like to share some of my learning with a little bit of opinion on the side.
As the second term of George W. Bush's presidency moves forward past the "end" of the war in Iraq, and the capture of Saddam Hussein, and all focus is pointed now at the victims of Katrina, I find a few of my recent observations disturbing. What I see these days in our "War on Terror" is that some people are not even sure what terrorism is. Sure, they can buttonhole certain people like Osama Bin-Laden or Idi Amin and can pick out organizations like al-Queda or the IRA, but can they really define terrorism? So, to see if you can define terror, let me give you a quick two question quiz.
Do you know who Idi Amin was?
Raise your hand if you don't know (Googling him after the question doesn't count). Then lower it, because none of us can see you, and you're scaring the guy sitting next to you at the hot spot. I'd invite you to take a look at his actions in Africa. Learning a little bit of history probably won't hurt you.
(Now for the real question)
Were the actions at Columbine terrorism?
Indeed, it is a loaded question, but the true answer here is no. The answer is no, not because the violence isn't "violent" enough, or the deaths weren't "enough", but rather because although terrorism has a very broad base of thought in American public view, it is actually a specific type of act. A car bombing, although killing many civilians, can be considered a non-terrorist act. So, in that vein, what is a terrorist, and what is a terroist act?
Terrorism is not a broad term. Although it encompasses many different actions, each terrorist act has to have four specific qualifications to even be considered terrorist. Terrorism is an act of violence with a political motive or goal, perpetrated against innocent persons, and is staged to be played before and audience whose reaction of fear and terror is the desired result. Under this working international definition of terrorism, a carbomb specifically laid out to kill American soldiers at a cafe or restaurant is not terrorism, but rather an act of guerilla warfare, because terrorism has to be perpetrated against innocent persons.
Keeping that in mind, what is a terrorist? Obviously, a terrorist is a person that uses terrorism to further their gains towards a political acheivement. But, in that case, how many terrorist acts make a person or group a terrorist? For instance, organizations like the Earth Liberation Front and Persons for the Equal Treatment of Animals have attacked and destroyed animal testing facilities. These groups are not considered terrorist organizations, but have commited terrorist activites to swing a political opinion. The question then becomes "What is a terrorist?" A terrorist is a person that uses terrorist activites to help their politcal stances, and ironically enough, are only given Terrorist status by the people they terrorize. The people decide who is considered a terrorist by the amount of violence that they was a public can tolerate.
That all being said, I find it troubling that we as a nation can not define terror and yet we're at war with it. The Patriot Act, which limits the rights of all American citizens, is in place largely due to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11th and yet the majority of the United States does not know what terrorism truly is. Random terror is a daily occurance in the Middle East. Tyrants continually terrorize their own people. If we as a nation do not know what we are up against and how it acts, then how can we defeat it?
Sources:
Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century - 4th ed., Combs, Cindy C.
As the second term of George W. Bush's presidency moves forward past the "end" of the war in Iraq, and the capture of Saddam Hussein, and all focus is pointed now at the victims of Katrina, I find a few of my recent observations disturbing. What I see these days in our "War on Terror" is that some people are not even sure what terrorism is. Sure, they can buttonhole certain people like Osama Bin-Laden or Idi Amin and can pick out organizations like al-Queda or the IRA, but can they really define terrorism? So, to see if you can define terror, let me give you a quick two question quiz.
Do you know who Idi Amin was?
Raise your hand if you don't know (Googling him after the question doesn't count). Then lower it, because none of us can see you, and you're scaring the guy sitting next to you at the hot spot. I'd invite you to take a look at his actions in Africa. Learning a little bit of history probably won't hurt you.
(Now for the real question)
Were the actions at Columbine terrorism?
Indeed, it is a loaded question, but the true answer here is no. The answer is no, not because the violence isn't "violent" enough, or the deaths weren't "enough", but rather because although terrorism has a very broad base of thought in American public view, it is actually a specific type of act. A car bombing, although killing many civilians, can be considered a non-terrorist act. So, in that vein, what is a terrorist, and what is a terroist act?
Terrorism is not a broad term. Although it encompasses many different actions, each terrorist act has to have four specific qualifications to even be considered terrorist. Terrorism is an act of violence with a political motive or goal, perpetrated against innocent persons, and is staged to be played before and audience whose reaction of fear and terror is the desired result. Under this working international definition of terrorism, a carbomb specifically laid out to kill American soldiers at a cafe or restaurant is not terrorism, but rather an act of guerilla warfare, because terrorism has to be perpetrated against innocent persons.
Keeping that in mind, what is a terrorist? Obviously, a terrorist is a person that uses terrorism to further their gains towards a political acheivement. But, in that case, how many terrorist acts make a person or group a terrorist? For instance, organizations like the Earth Liberation Front and Persons for the Equal Treatment of Animals have attacked and destroyed animal testing facilities. These groups are not considered terrorist organizations, but have commited terrorist activites to swing a political opinion. The question then becomes "What is a terrorist?" A terrorist is a person that uses terrorist activites to help their politcal stances, and ironically enough, are only given Terrorist status by the people they terrorize. The people decide who is considered a terrorist by the amount of violence that they was a public can tolerate.
That all being said, I find it troubling that we as a nation can not define terror and yet we're at war with it. The Patriot Act, which limits the rights of all American citizens, is in place largely due to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11th and yet the majority of the United States does not know what terrorism truly is. Random terror is a daily occurance in the Middle East. Tyrants continually terrorize their own people. If we as a nation do not know what we are up against and how it acts, then how can we defeat it?
Sources:
Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century - 4th ed., Combs, Cindy C.
