Wolfowitz's Hotel Is Attacked in Baghdad

house18 · Oct 29, 2003

Originally posted by oman
From American Heritage:

Terrorism:

"The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."

How was Hiroshima and Nagasaki NOT terrorism by this definition? If you want to say that the US Govt. is not an "organized" group, then I guess you may weasel out of it.

But dropping the bomb on civilians in order to intimidate the Japanese Govt. is exactly what this was. And it was very different from attacking primarily military targets.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, but according to this definition military is not mentioned, so any act of violence would be terrorism, including in a war.

Ian McCracken · Oct 29, 2003

Originally posted by Dan Loney
So there was a smarter version of the "Saddam Dead - Confirmation in 72 Hours" post that you chose not to make?
Click to expand...

When you get a Saddam sighting, let me know. Thanks.

Dan Loney · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by Ian McCracken
When you get a Saddam sighting, let me know. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I'll have that for you in three days.

Snarf snarf snarf

NSlander · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by Dan Loney
I'll have that for you in three days.

Snarf snarf snarf
Click to expand...

Thundercats special ops?

DamonEsquire · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by house18
Ahhh, but according to this definition military is not mentioned, so any act of violence would be terrorism, including in a war.
Click to expand...

Negative confinement vying for country versus country on terrorism. In the end, victorious movements sought by lesser through change of pace (beginning and middle). It could occur with recapitulation. Country versus organization. This is not worthy of success. The organization seeks change. So, principles requiring country of defense. They may take up fight. Either way, it is not terrorism; if a country is in tact.

BenReilly · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by DamonEsquire
In the end, victorious movements sought by lesser through change of pace (beginning and middle).
Click to expand...

No, no. You botched your line. It's, "In the end, there can be only one!"

fishbiproduct · Oct 30, 2003

Yeah, what he says.

Foosinho · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by DamonEsquire
Negative confinement vying for country versus country on terrorism. In the end, victorious movements sought by lesser through change of pace (beginning and middle). It could occur with recapitulation. Country versus organization. This is not worthy of success. The organization seeks change. So, principles requiring country of defense. They may take up fight. Either way, it is not terrorism; if a country is in tact.
Click to expand...

Does this make anyone else feel like they are trying to read Douglas Adams while on absinthe?

BenReilly · Oct 30, 2003

Originally posted by Foosinho
Does this make anyone else feel like they are trying to read Douglas Adams while on absinthe?
Click to expand...

Actually, it's like reading something that's gone through Babelfish 5 or 6 times.