202
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: + +
→Government
::The term is not accurate. "State sponsored terrorism" is an [[oxymoron]]. States, by definition, cannot be terroristic (including the Nazis, or whomever else you want to name) because their forces are ALWAYS military. Calling state actions terrorism is the equivalent of saying the US Navy Seals are state sponsored terrorists-- does that make it more clear? The term SST entered the lexicon probably in the same way "irregardless" did, as a useless modifier. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 17:38, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
::The term is not accurate. "State sponsored terrorism" is an [[oxymoron]]. States, by definition, cannot be terroristic (including the Nazis, or whomever else you want to name) because their forces are ALWAYS military. Calling state actions terrorism is the equivalent of saying the US Navy Seals are state sponsored terrorists-- does that make it more clear? The term SST entered the lexicon probably in the same way "irregardless" did, as a useless modifier. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 17:38, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
It is possible for states to harbour, fund or support terrorists due to the fact that, although not being part of the state, they are considered to have the same aims as the controlling party of said state. Hence whilst not strictly "state sponsored terrorism" this could be construed as "state sanctioned terrorism".