Biden was correct!

[zappasguitar]

Once upon a time Id have said a rag tag group of 20 amature pilots did not a terrorist make.

It was not a row boat.

It seems many have forgotten how a small group of men in a rubber raft attacked the USS Cole. They were called terrorists.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It seems many have forgotten how a small group of men in a rubber raft attacked the USS Cole. They were called terrorists.

at least they attacked an actual military target. terrorist should not have applied there either.

 

[zappasguitar]

Calling pirates terrorists would be like calling drug dealers terrorists.

Wasn't it just a few years ago that the Bush Admin claimed anyone who bought illegal drugs was helping the terrorists?

Even THEY were calling drug dealers terrorists.

 

[Epicurus]

It seems many have forgotten how a small group of men in a rubber raft attacked the USS Cole. They were called terrorists.

Are you people professionally stupid?

Of course they were fucking terrorists. They were attacking a military ship to make a political point, not holding it hostage for ransom money.

 

[Epicurus]

Wasn't it just a few years ago that the Bush Admin claimed anyone who bought illegal drugs was helping the terrorists?

Even THEY were calling drug dealers terrorists.

They did say something to that effect, but it was as stupid then as the pirate-terrorist comparisons are now. If you can't see the distinct moral difference in the nature of their work then I'm sorry.

A mugger is not a terrorist. Neither is a mugger on water.

 

[Damocles]

at least they attacked an actual military target. terrorist should not have applied there either.

The correct terminology for that one would be guerrilla warfare.

 

[zappasguitar]

Are you people professionally stupid?

Of course they were fucking terrorists. They were attacking a military ship to a political point, not holding it hostage for ransom money.

Nothing like an unwarranted personal attack to keep the discussion on point.

Another poster pointed out that the pirates were in a lifeboat, as if that fact alone somehow disqualified them from being terrorists. I was simply pointing out the size of the craft the pirates/terrorists use isn't important.

Put please, feel free to call me all the childish names you like. I got past being bothered by namecalling in the 5th grade.

 

[zappasguitar]

They did say something to that effect, but it was as stupid then as the pirate-terrorist comparisons are now. If you can't see the distinct moral difference in the nature of their work then I'm sorry.

A mugger is not a terrorist. Neither is a mugger on water.

Ahhhhhh, but when it is convenient to them, a drug dealer IS a terrorist to Republicans.

 

[Epicurus]

Nothing like an unwarranted personal attack to keep the discussion on point.

Another poster pointed out that the pirates were in a lifeboat, as if that fact alone somehow disqualified them from being terrorists. I was simply pointing out the size of the craft the pirates/terrorists use isn't important.

Put please, feel free to call me all the childish names you like. I got past being bothered by namecalling in the 5th grade.

Okay. What is important to me is their intent. The intent of a terrorist is to kill people to bring attention to political demands. The intent of a pirate is to get money. If piracy goes right, no one is even hurt. To me, the two are miles apart morally because of that.

 

[uscitizen]

If piracy goes right, no one is even hurt.
//

sure it is just a cost of doing business passed on to the consumers. Guess who they are?

 

[Epicurus]

If piracy goes right, no one is even hurt.
//

sure it is just a cost of doing business passed on to the consumers. Guess who they are?

Uscitizen. Do you have a point? I'm tired of your stupid questions. You are not Socrates.

 

[uscitizen]

Uscitizen. Do you have a point? I'm tired of your stupid questions. You are not Socrates.

No I am not Socrates. Your point being?

 

[zappasguitar]

Okay. What is important to me is their intent. The intent of a terrorist is to kill people to bring attention to political demands. The intent of a pirate is to get money. If piracy goes right, no one is even hurt. To me, the two are miles apart morally because of that.

But pirates use the threat of harm or death as a means to their end, striking terror into the hearts of their captives.

 

[Epicurus]

But pirates use the threat of harm or death as a means to their end, striking terror into the hearts of their captives.

If that is your criteria, then muggers, rapists, and common armed robbers also fit that definition. Should we call them terrorists too?

I should hope your answer would be no. To misapply the word so casually makes it lose its meaning. It's like what the Republicans have done with the word "socialism". They used it to describe so many Democratic policies in the past that now that Democrats really are implementing socialist policies the public doesn't care because the word has no meaning to them anymore. The Republicans burned it away by crying wolf.

 

[zappasguitar]

If that is your criteria, then muggers, rapists, and common armed robbers also fit that definition. Should we call them terrorists too?

I should hope your answer would be no. To misapply the word so casually makes it lose its meaning. It's like what the Republicans have done with the word "socialism". They used it to describe so many Democratic policies in the past that now that Democrats really are implementing socialist policies the public doesn't care because the word has no meaning to them anymore. The Republicans burned it away by crying wolf.

When a mugger jams his gun in your back and demands your wallet, does he threaten to KILL you?

Or does he tell you how nice your hair is in the hopes that some flattery might get him what he wants?

Now, I don't think of your common mugger as a terrorist, but by one razor-thin definition he meets the criteria.

Call them what you want, but a mugger uses the victim's TERROR to get what he wants.

 

[blackascoal]

He actually gave the order several times. My question is how "in danger" was the hostage's life? Were these kids really so stupid as to believe they would get anywhere alive if they killed that man?

Good point.

 

[blackascoal]

If this was a test .. it ain't over.

 

[Damocles]

When a mugger jams his gun in your back and demands your wallet, does he threaten to KILL you?

Or does he tell you how nice your hair is in the hopes that some flattery might get him what he wants?

Now, I don't think of your common mugger as a terrorist, but by one razor-thin definition he meets the criteria.

Call them what you want, but a mugger uses the victim's TERROR to get what he wants.

So does a writer. However a terrorist uses specific targets to create terror among those who are not there. Are you afraid of a mugger who isn't robbing you? Do you go about in terror because people get robbed? What was their intention, to get the money, or to spread fear?

These are the mark of a terrorist.

 

[Epicurus]

When a mugger jams his gun in your back and demands your wallet, does he threaten to KILL you?

Or does he tell you how nice your hair is in the hopes that some flattery might get him what he wants?

Now, I don't think of your common mugger as a terrorist, but by one razor-thin definition he meets the criteria.

Call them what you want, but a mugger uses the victim's TERROR to get what he wants.

That's my point.

You have created a uselessly broad definition of the term terrorist. It's much more meaningful of a term if you narrow the definition to using terror to achieve political and religious objectives, which is how analysts usually define it.

 

[Adam Weinberg]

Heh... I read it as "Salami Terrorists".