ith all the above discussions going on I figured I would make another one of my discussion threads.

Rules are as followed

Heavy debates are fine but flaming will result in 2+ week ban.

Do not super multi-quote, delete quotes if over 4 quotes in one post.

All forum rules apply on a base level

Foul language isnt tolarated and will result in warning or ban mattering number of offenses.

Now for subject matter:

What is terrorism? Terrorism is a buzzword connected to groups that perform actions against another nation that are viewed by that nations and other nations as evil. While these acts of terrorism attributes to this isnt this a similar thing that the US, Britain, France, and other first world countries do to small or poor third world countries to change their political stance? The mentions first world countries could very much be viewed as terrorist nations by third world countries being invaded.

In other nations these terrorists as we call them might not be viewed as evil by their citizens and government (corrupt or not) because they view our terrorists as freedom fighters in a fashion similar to how we view our soldiers. They are trying to announce and force in their own views by force and extreme measures like 9/11.

This basically goes into the bases of the struggle of good versus evil but here is the paradox of sorts. If one side thinks their actions are just and the other also believes their acts are just while both sides also have support of civilians around the nations they are apart of and around the world how can either side truly be evil if both their actions have some form of justification?

Going into the battle raging right now between Israel and Hamas right now shows this exact issue. Which side is the just good side and which is the dark evil side when both sides have when out of their ways to inflict the most damage on each other without care while justifying their actions.

My conclusion is that we need to avoid the buzzword "Terrorism" and naming "Terrorists" due to the fact that its more slander for people acting on belief. There are groups that would fall into the evil category but they arent terrorists, they are called a collective of murderers. If something attacks one of our nations dont consider it that your going out to fight the terrorists, no we are fighting the guys that attacked us. No added buzzwords needed. There is no true good or evil to this world, just what one side thinks is just and what the other thinks is just.

Last time I checked back in the middle ages when there was wars between kingdoms they just considered battles well battles for land or control of the opposing side's empire. There was no nicknaming of the empire that started the attack. We never heard the Romans writing in their texts "Today there was an act of terrorism in our northern cities by the the terrorist group the Greeks." They simply stated they were attacked, then stated that they should get payback.

Now lets discuss this as civilized people, please.

well, just a reminder, back in the days, say the 19th century, "first-world" countries were often called imperialists.

we've seen great progress since then. not to say that there aren't underhanded activities by powers like US, UK or France that undermine small governments in places like Africa and South America, but things have changed a lot. indeed, we witnessed it in the almost-universal hate towards bush's foreign policies.

in my mind, terrorism pretty much has to mean the destructive action of a group of minority against the establishment. that means, in my book, a lot of things would qualify for terrorism, but when a major power commits "terrorism", i would categorize that as imperialism.

as far as enemies are concerned, i agree with you. the bottom line is, history is written by the winner. it has always been the case, and it will continue to be the case.

While it is/can be destructive, there a meaning behind the attacks something that most people in the attacked nations seem to tune out. Most of the time it isnt as extreme as Osama wants but more of a statement of that actions within a nation doesnt comply with the way we want the nation to be or how a nation feels it should be treated.

One of Hamas's reasons for attacking Israel is because they feel mistreated which is true. Israel treats them like crap. Israel has stated they only hired the Palistinians as basically slaves or low level workers. They are not even willing to give the the chance to better themselves.

I think the difference between terrorism and armed conflict is when you target a peoples population rather then there combatants.

Collataral damage does happen... but terrorists don't even bother targeting armed forces. Though really what Hamas is doing would be seen more as War Crimes. Or should be except nobody recognizes Hamas as the legal government despite being legally elected... (Stupid really)

As for Israel vs Palestine... hard to say... the Palestinians eventually need to wake up, get rid of Hamas and deal.

Israel holds all the cards... and will likely continue to hold all the cards... and if they don't.... it will just get worse for the Palestinians.

Every day the extremists who hate the otherside grow on each side... this is a problem for Palestine because... well like I said. Israel holds all the cards. If an extreme racist right wing group every came into power...

Anything could happen.

Now i don't see anything wrong with this.  It's not like they don't hire any arabs into higher level positions.

Just Palestinians... who aren't part of Israel... and are basically an unofficial company.

That'd be like Mexico compalining that the US doesn't hire any of it's workers into management positions.

i'm not saying there's not a meaning behind attacks.  indeed, the palestinian cause on many levels is essentially a resistance movement, which has occurred throughout history.  just so happens that back then people didn't really have modern weapons to cause the destruction they are capable of today.

on the flip side, israel is in itself also a resistance movement.  how would a country feel when it is surrounded by nothing but enemies?  it's just that it's been victorious over and over again, thanks in no small part to the united states of course, but that's a different story.  and again, on the flip side, without US support, israel certainly would have been wiped off the middle east map decades ago.

just so happens that "terrorism" these days are so heavily linked to religious fundamentalism.  although thankfully, we're seeing the term increasingly being used for activists' actions as well, thus bringing to the public a broader awareness of the term.

We need to stop reffering to countries or groups as "good" or "evil". Its not a movie, a cartoon. I think we could learn lessons if we bothered to educate ourselves about our own nations and its history. Its not always positive, look at Great Britain over the last 400 yrs, or Australia and our attempted extermination of indigenous aboriginals or America, even the USA is guilty of gross crimes.

The trouble is this stereotype of im good and your not just doesn't work. Israel is the aggressor in this conflict, despite the rocket shelling (how many israeli's have died vs what 900 pal), and it is quite obvious judging by the death toll. Ofcourse, Israel is not evil or just good but neither is Gaza.

sure since this is actually educational since your telling us termed created ages ago. Always good to know background of what your discussing.

Death tolls don't decide agressors.

Who is attacking first does.

Just because the agressor is somewhat incompetant at attacking doesn't mean they aren't the agressor.

When the US screwed up the Bay of Pigs invasion it was still the agressor even though it lost.