Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasczak  Why are you so hell bent on changing the subject?
Yes, uniformed military can do something immoral like targetting civilians. An example would be Sherman's march to the sea during our War Between the States.
You asked me to define terrorism. I did. Now can we get on with the discussion we were having? It left off with:
"Their religion is the driving force and the one common denominator in virtually all terrorist activity around the globe. Race isn't it. Geography isn't it. The United States or George W. Bush isn't it. Their religious beliefs are." |
I'm not really changing the subject at all. My issue here is that your discussion of terrorism seems to be based on a definition of terrorism that is quite vague. Any discussion based on such a definition seems pretty doomed and pointless to me. This is highlighted directly by your last sentence quoted above. Because you are excluding anything perpetrated by States (or individuals hired by States for that matter), you make the claim that virtually all terrorism is due to Islam. The very word 'terrorists', in my opinion, has become virtually useless because it has itself become a propaganda tool - in much the same way that the word 'communists' was in days gone by.