[Changleen]

Just saw this on the Beeb - Interesting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4488513.stm

Point 1: Washington has long defined "terrorism" as politically motivated violence against non-combatants

Point 2: Attacks targeting US or other forces in Iraq are not included

Point 3: "Significant" terror attacks result in loss of life, serious injury, or major damage

So, all those insurgents apparantly are not terrorists after all. Somebody needs to tell DT and $tinkle.

 

[Damn True]

Insurgent my arse, that is as absurd as calling Che Guevara a "freedom fighter".

IMO they are terrorists.
I don't agree with everything that comes out of Washington.

IMO if you are dressed like a woman going to the market and you drive a car bomb into a busload of people you are a freakin terrorist.

In case you are wondering, that exact scenario was nearly played out less than a month ago in Mosul. The guy that used to live next to me in Hawaii was at a checkpoint that the car bomber attempted to run. They killed the dude (dressed like a Suni woman....nice) and in the car found a map with a bus route marked in highlighter and a hand written log of the times the target bus was at certain locations.

 

[Changleen]

and in the car found a map with a bus route marked in highlighter and a hand written log of the times the target bus was at certain locations.

Not smart enough to just pick up a timetable eh?

 

[Changleen]

Out of interest did you read the rest of the article?

 

[Changleen]

IMO if you are dressed like a woman going to the market and you drive a car bomb into a busload of people you are a freakin terrorist.

Depends on who is in the bus.

 

[Damn True]

Not smart enough to just pick up a timetable eh?

I kinda doubt they've had enough free time (what with all the terroists blowing stuff up) to have fancy bus schedules printed.

 

[schweino1]

if the target of the attack is the US soldiers they are "insurgents" even if innocent people dies. if the target is the people or to prove a political or religious point, then they are terrorists...

if not... then those guys shooting 1000s of bombs into a city are terrorists as well.... even if if they were shooting to "estrategicaly targeted objectives", the damage and "non-combatent" casualties were huge...

dont you think...>?

in WAR nobody wins... specially the "inocent people"

IMO even if this guys in iraq are waked enough to kill themselves attached to a bomb, they think they are fighting for the right side.... i mean, in their obscured minds they feel a foreign army is invading their home.... of course there is the diplomatic way, but these gorups are extremists.... so.... they use bombs...

IMO.... there are terrorist attacks over ther but a lot of "insurgent movements" too....

 

[schweino1]

and traveling in the bus with a bomb in the chest....

well, they cant afford bradley vehicles or tanks...

too bad tough that thay are killing the people they are pretending to represent...

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

 

[TheMontashu]

Hey im not going to complain green peace now falls under "terrorist group"

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

IMO even if this guys in iraq are waked enough to kill themselves attached to a bomb, they think they are fighting for the right side.... i mean, in their obscured minds they feel a foreign army is invading their home.... of course there is the diplomatic way, but these gorups are extremists.... so.... they use bombs...

IMO even if this guys in the US are waked enough to kill people bombing the crap out them based on false evidence , they think they are fighting for the right side.... i mean, in their obscured minds they feel a foreign army (of iraqui terrorist) is invading their home (texas) .... of course there is the diplomatic way, but these gorups are extremists.... so.... they use bombs...

you see.. you can have it both ways and still make sense....