Just what IS terrorism?

First, right now, the Nation State of Iraq does not exist. There is no Iraqi Government. If China invaded Taiwan that is exactly the legal position they would take. The indeterminate status of Taiwan is one of the great threats in the world today.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That may well be what you believe, but without a government there can be no state. Actually, there were two French Governments, the recognized Vichy Government and the government in exile of De Gaulle. Good example. The existing royal family fled to France for protection. Afterall, they were the excuse used for the invasion which was actually aimed at Portugal. One of the first steps that Napoleon took was to have his brother declared King of Spain. Again, no government, no nation. Well, it doesn't much matter. I don't have anything to say about it. There is no yes or no answer to the China situation.In the past, the US recognized Taiwan as a state. That is not the case today. The US has adopted the One China Protocol but they have very carefully avoided defining what that means. The US has said that they would likely intervene if the Mainland tried to take the islands by force, but even there we have held our options open.Taiwan is an anomaly, a Nation State recognized purely for economic reasons while all nations make a pretense of its non-existence.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

What formula?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, let me try to summarize and you good folk can then tear it up. Maybe that way we can come up with something even better.I don't think that motive is valid in distinguishing between Terrorism and Acts of War. Rather, I think the only subjective thing we can pin down is who are the partcipants.If it is a Nation State it is an Act of War. It can be moral or immoral, legal or illegal but it is an Act of War.When the folk committing the activity are not a Nation State, it is Terrorism. It can be moral or immoral, but it is never legal.The big issue, and the place where it gets hard to make decisions, is when the conflict is between a Nation State and a NGO.How will that be handled?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It is you that is adding the emotive content, not me. Well now, that's just plain laughable. Look through my posts in this thread and pont out where I made that argument. You're starting to sound a lot like good old WILLOWTREE.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Interesting points. But I don't see much difference between what you've said and what I've said. As I ponted out several messages back, the area where it gets hard to define is when the conflict is between Nation States and NGOs. I'd disagree with that one. I don't believe you can lump the three situations together. Let me try to explain my point of view. First, when talking Nation State vs Nation State, it is nearly impossible to make absolute judgements about motive and threat. Did Japan have reason to believe prior to attacking Pearl Harbor that the US posed a credible threat?In the other two cases it is somewhat easier to determine if a credible threat exists and so such acts could well be called terrorism. But as I said, the conflicts between Nation States and NGOs could be harder to identify.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It's laughable because I never made such a statement.You said, "All your argument says is that "terrorism" is an opportunistic and slanderous description of the violence of the enemy."Please point out where I said that.The thread title and subject is Just what IS terrorism?I have tried to answer TTBOMA, that question. It is not about whether or not the term should be used, whether it is an appropriate designation or even if terrorism is an emotionally charged term or not. It is trying to define what the term means.If you would like to define terrorism as "an opportunistic and slanderous description of the violence of the enemy", then fine. We will acknowledge that contracycle believes that is the definition of terrorism.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I am perfectly willing to let the readers decide if what I said correspondes to what you have alleged that I said. Your statement was: You claim that is the same as my statement: I believe your statement is laughable.Let the other readers judge.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I have always said that the issue between Nation States and NGOs will be difficult to resolve.AbELook at the Entiebbe incident. It really breaks down into several seperate events. The Hijacking was terrorism. The actions of the Ugandan Government were of a Nation State supporting terrorism. That would be exactly the same as the US support for terrorism during the Reagan years. The actions of the Israeli Government were those of a Nation State fighting terrorism.This message has been edited by jar, 11-18-2004 02:30 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

IMHO we are currently seeing a major change in the basic organizational format of the world, a redifinition of the nature of community. The end result will be a change in the concept of Nation State and as big a change world wide as was seen with the consolidations of city-states into Nation States that continued into the late 1800's.Part of these changes will be new forms of exerting pressure, both militarily and economically, and new forms of political organization. I believe the issue of Terrorism is part and parcel of that sea change.One of our limitations is that much of our terminology is based on references from 50, 100 and 200 years ago. Part of what I was trying to say earlier in this thread is that we either need to come up with new terms or remove the implied and hiding connotations from the terms we use. It is not a simple terrorism is bad and Nation State war is good issue. Both can be very, very bad, both can effect civilians or militray targets, both can be driven by a host of motives.The bigger question, for me, is that the whole existing organization structure is changing. Part of this is the rapid expansion of communications, both physical in the ability to move people and materials around, and more traditional in the ability to move thought, knowledge, opinion and chatter.I don't know where all this will end. But I also do not see anyway that the overall disruption of lives or systems can be any less than was was seen following the final consolidation of the city-states into Nation States.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion