Skip to main content

View Diary: Frank Rich "State-Sponsored Terrorism!" (197 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Sorry (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes, Subterranean

    an attack on a military base is not terrorism.

    Unless you think an attack on the military forces of a country - forces whose whole purpose is to fight -  is morally equivalent to an attack on civilians.

    The whole reason the word terrorism was defined was because we found the concept of attacks of civilians so abhorrent.

    If terrorism now applies to both, you are saying civilians are not a special case.

    •  I agree with this (0+ / 0-)

      Calling a mass shooting anywhere a "terrorist attack" completely ignores the definition of terrorism, as most of us have talked about and debated over the last 10 years.

      Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

      Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
      Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
      Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

      So while mass shootings do involve acts dangerous to human life, they are not intended to intimidate or coerce the government or the civilian population into changing policy or conduct.
      Unless all the mass shooters were pro-gun control.

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Thu Sep 19, 2013 at 03:55:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site