Subject:
|
Re: More on Palestine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 Oct 2001 20:43:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1626 times
|
| |
|
|
Ross Crawford wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > I think the bigger question is what is YOURS?
> >
> > I believe most people in here can see the difference between the WTC attack and a
> > nation trying to end a protracted war (with an enemy that had proved time and time
> > again that it would suicide, use geurilla tactics, and dig in until wiped out at
> > enormous cost of lives on both sides) as quickly as possible while minimizing the
> > lives lost.
>
> You're probably right, Tom, and I can see the difference, too. I simply
> asked what your definition of terrorism is?
That's a good question. I don't know if I'd pin it down to a hard definition applied
universally. It almost needs a case-by-case analysis.
But I certainly don't see Hiroshima/Nagasaki as acts of terrorism, and DO see WTC as
acts of terrorism.
--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support
| Sun Microsystems Customer Service
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: More on Palestine
|
| (...) and a (...) and time (...) out at (...) minimizing the (...) applied (...) WTC as (...) Thanks, Tom. I agree that there's no single "catch-all" definition of terrorism. There's a bit of a discussion about it here (URL) quote from there: "The (...) (25 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
117 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
