General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A Note On 'Drone Strikes', Ladies And Gentlemen [View all]The Magistrate
(96,043 posts)I doubt I have used the word 'terrorism' more than a half dozen times in comment here. 'Terrorism'is an exceedingly odd word, as its real meaning is 'violence for a political end the person using the word disapproves of', and so, while the word conveys meaning in regards to the one uttering it, it conveys no meaning at all in regards to the acts or persons it is applied to.
Viewed from another angle, the word simply indicates that a group is violating the accustomed monopoly of states on the use of violence for political ends, and claiming the right to act as if were a state rather than a body of private persons. Something more in the nature of a union carpenter complaining about a nonunion crew building somebody's back porch, than a serious objection on morals or principles. For states refer to actions by such bodies which fail the test of atrocity as 'terrorism' routinely,and states just as routinely commit atrocity in suppressing the actions of such groups against a state.
I stated specifically 'a loose-knit body of Islamic fundamentalists engaged in hostilities against the United States' was the other end of a de facto state of war, and that would be so even if they had never killed anyone not in military uniform, or never conducted an attack against anything that was not a legitimate military target.