...and over here, gentlemen, the typical mind of a brainwashed human zombie.

US & NATO are angels

I think you missed the point of what i wrote.

Totaly isnt interested in your content.
Really just likes hit and run jabs.
Only to those targeted though.
Like a certain ficticious figure in dutch
Lore.

See the link i posted above.

KIND OF LIKE YOU CANT FIGHT COMMUNISM EITHER sorry caps lock was on and im lazy.
both are ideas
jihadis cant kill freedom
hitler cant kill judaism
we couldnt kill communism
and now we cant kill terrorism
how do you kill what isnt living.
sure its a zombie question but its how the military industrial complex cyphens our money, a new idea is the threat, so any human being can be an example of it dependant on the governments or militaries needs.if it was a guy, like saddam for instance what was that good for, a month maybe three i think before we snagged his ass?and how long ago did we stop really expecting bin laden to be found, like by the time we went into iraq we were well over bin laden
but keep us scared of an idea, and thats bitch you can drain for ever.mccarthy style

are you now, or ever been a terrorist?

By definition, this is not terrorism. You may consider it indiscriminate killing, but it cannot be terrorism.

terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

You provided the correct definition of terrorism. Which proves terrorism does not apply to this situation.

The US did not intentionally kill a grandfather to scare the population into making a political change. If there is no political motive it is not terrorism.

Come now, You don't see how this would terrorize other families? You really think the terror motive has to be there for an action to be called terrorism? Who the terrorist is depends on where you are standing when the bullets are flying and the bombs are falling.

Stating you were only trying to get some other perceived bad guy does not change the consequences of your actions. Terrorism is a perception.

By definition it cannot be terrorism without a political motive behind the killings. Not only that, but unless the killings were deliberate attempts to enact a political change it cannot be terrorism.

Terrorism is a clear cut term defined by actions with a political goal. This would simply be state sponsored murder or even guerrilla type warfare.

"The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person"... "against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies"

I am surprised you do not see intentional invasion, force, intimidation, violence against this family this as terrorism.

If you want to argue the overall war in Afghanistan is an act of terrorism then the argument would have merit. I would disagree, but it would at least fit the definition of terrorism.

It is not terrorism unless there is a political motive. Terrorism is an act carried out against a population to enact a political change.

States can commit acts of terror if there is a political end goal. This would not be an example of state sponsored terrorism.

Goodness grief. Go on and believe what you will Terror is terror. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/terror

This is terrorism! when families have done nothing wrong are being killed and no one is being charged for a crime.... IT'S CALLED TERRORISM!!

I'm using the correct definition of terrorism. I'm just sick of people using the word so liberally without actually using it in the correct context. Terrorism is a specific set of actions. It is not terrorism anytime someone kills an innocent civilian.

This is the State Department's definition of terrorism:

# The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
# The term "international terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country.
# The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.

Go ahead and tell that to the families of those that have died on both sides. FUCK our state department definitions. This country has been sponsoring terrorism in Central and South America for decades. Like I said; call it what you will.

I'm not trying to diminish the death of the man in any way. I'm simply saying, that by definition, it was not an act of terrorism.

it can be terrorism if that is the means by wich we gained controll or attempted to gain control of a region.ya know as opposed to defeating an actual enemy wich we have yet to do in afganastan.

thier is a political motive, to be scarier than the taliban and force support.ya think psy ops never told them intimidation is a powerfull tool?dont get me wrong i love my soldiers, but they tend to be meatheads who know the power of fear over a subject inside and out.

You are completely wrong, but thanks for playing.

i honest to god think jj has aquired a coke habit, and is running multiple names concurrently, even arguing with himself from time to time.i think he is doing a vaudvillian representation of various conservative sereotypes out of spite that he has been exiled from the reasonable.

actualy terrorising a person, people,or groups of people are acts of terrorism.and when we send our airforce to drop ordanance on people who have never seen a plane before it certainly qualifies.

no you are gnoring all context in the interest of splitting hairs

he likes to do that to make you doubt yourself.... trust me... he's done it in the past and everyone has caught on to the bullshit! just leave him alone... let's hope someone picks him up and saves him!

jj right or is this a new entity of malreasoning?

Not jj. This is a large country and amazingly so many just say what they are told instead of turning on to what it is like to be in a given situation. Know thy self for real.

State Department will call it whatever they want to approve their actions of terrorism.

I completely agree with your observation.

Sorry, simply saying "you're wrong" doesn't make it so.

You've used opinion as your evidence. I've used the actual definition of terrorism, used by terrorist experts throughout the world, as well as the State Department, as my evidence.

I'll let readers choose which evidence to believe.

why not?

ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun

1. The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. - CHECK

2. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. - CHECK

3. A terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. - CHECK

where are you getting your definitions?
This is not about a dead grampa. This is about the systematic assassination of thousands of civilians.

Juas,

What would be the political motive in this specific action?

That was my argument. If there is no political motive it is not terrorism.

lol... it's jj...

wouldnt it be great if he were actualy knowledgeable and pushed people forward instead of arguing just for the sake of it in a cyclical fashion.

if only wishes were granted.... lol..

Wow I didn't realize there was real footage from the front. lol Sounds more like the politicians running the show. Sad truth.

its the satire our culture is some how lacking.
how did we go from saturday night live being counter culture to present day.we have sold free speech.infomania and the daily show are like the last two endevours to point out our own idiocy.

the guys who made this stuff also made liberal mockery, just a lil less funny as the left doesnt provide as much material.

lol so true...

im sorry im sure its serious, but im high and cant keep my mind of of bad fart jokes.

I should take a lesson. I'm watching The Hidden Massacre of Fallujah. Not funny at all.

ive had my fill, and i know exactly what is done by all of us, islamic fundamentalists,zionist hardliners, western capitalists,despotic theocracies.after a while a pattern emerges and each incident is just a sick parody of its predicesor.
im in awe we havent destroyed ourselves as a species yet, or at least learned from the bazillion times we do this its ramafications always out live its gains.

we want a free democratic iraq?really do we?what would a functioning iraq complete with a military force look like for the west who shit all over them, a desired goal or a repeat of giving the store to bin laden in the 80s.

Thanks !