Difference between revisions of "Terrorism"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Terrorism''' is a term used to refer to violence (usually against civilians) instigated to further a certain political or ideological goal. | '''Terrorism''' is a term used to refer to violence (usually against civilians) instigated to further a certain political or ideological goal. | ||
| − | That's obviously not a good definition, unless you want to include ''all'' armed action. By saying ''usually'' against civilians, violent action against armies is not ruled out as a form of terrorism. For example, by that definition George Washington's fight at Valley Forge would be considered terrorism. I assume that's not what the person who wrote that definition intended. | + | That's obviously not a good definition, unless you want to include ''all'' armed action. By saying ''usually'' against civilians, violent action against armies is not ruled out as a form of terrorism. For example, by that definition George Washington's fight at Valley Forge would be considered terrorism (because it was violent and it sought to further a political goal). I assume that's not what the person who wrote that definition intended. |
It's also not a good definition because it seems some terrorist violence is not intended to further political or ideological goals. For instance, were the Aum Shinrikyo sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo subway a form of terrorism, and if so, what political or ideological goal did they support? | It's also not a good definition because it seems some terrorist violence is not intended to further political or ideological goals. For instance, were the Aum Shinrikyo sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo subway a form of terrorism, and if so, what political or ideological goal did they support? | ||
Revision as of 08:37, March 13, 2007
Terrorism is a term used to refer to violence (usually against civilians) instigated to further a certain political or ideological goal.
That's obviously not a good definition, unless you want to include all armed action. By saying usually against civilians, violent action against armies is not ruled out as a form of terrorism. For example, by that definition George Washington's fight at Valley Forge would be considered terrorism (because it was violent and it sought to further a political goal). I assume that's not what the person who wrote that definition intended.
It's also not a good definition because it seems some terrorist violence is not intended to further political or ideological goals. For instance, were the Aum Shinrikyo sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo subway a form of terrorism, and if so, what political or ideological goal did they support?
Well-Known Terrorist Groups
- The Crusaders
- Al-Qaeda
- The Irish Republican Army
- The Tamil Tigers
- The Ku Klux Klan