Alright I'm not gonna go back and quote somebody five pages back, but I don't think it makes sense to call this terrorism. I don't think it makes sense to call that Muslim who shot up the gay bar terrorism (even if I did at the time I'm calling bull**** on myself). To me making the definition of terrorism is so vague as to become useless. Including this or Columbine or other "lone wolf" attacks or attacks by people who are just crazy, angry, and isolated from society makes no sense. Why should any of those acts be equated to 9/11 or suicide bombings perpetrated by organizations who are essentially non-state armies? It's just a way to talk about muslim terrorists without using the word "muslim".
Even if it's not the dictionary definition I think the only way for terrorism to make sense as a concept is to use it to describe those paramilitary organizations like Al Qaeda and the IRA that operation in those general modus operandi. Cause, again, what's the point of putting this guy in Vegas in the same boat as Osama Bin Laden? What the **** do they even have in common besides killing a bunch of civilians? What purpose is being served?
And yeah I was definitely a cock in that thread about the Paris shooting.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien
There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.
|
|