I like that quote: "A terrorist is someone who tries to extort political change by threatening a civilian population with death and destruction."
So when the German's in WWII dropped V2 rockets on London ... that was terrorism. Ok. And when we fire bombed Dresden that too was terrorism. Ok. And when we fire bombed Tokyo that was terorism. Ok. And when we vaporized the civilian population of two Japanese cities of no military or strategic value that too was terrorism. Are you seeing a trend here?
Once again I implore those of you willing to engage in this mental joust ... think more deeply ... apply a few synapses to the discussion. These shallow responses are worthy of Fox News but not thinking people in a science forum.
It is not that I have a problem with the definition. It actually seems pretty reasonable to me. But do understand that when you create an accurate definition you MUST also have the ethical and moral integrity to acknowledge its implications.
