Skip to main content

View Diary: The return of Droney (231 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's a fair question, (5+ / 0-)

    and the answer depends on who you ask. Most students of the taxonomy of political violence would not count targeted assassinations as terrorism. They are intended to eliminate a particular political foe (think Archbishop Romero in El Salvador, 1980).

    But what about attacks that are one part targeted assassination plus an indeterminate number of parts  "collateral damage?" This combination accurately characterizes many suicide bombings by "terrorists," but it also accurately characterizes many drone strikes. It seems to me that if one is terrorism, so is the other.

    Then there's this question: if terrorizing a population to redirect their political will is not part of the intent of an act of political violence, is it terrorism? Is it fair or useful to distinguish between intentional and unintentional terrorism?

    The GOP can't win on ideas. They can only win by lying, cheating, and stealing. So they do.

    by psnyder on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 08:11:33 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site