News Defining Terrorism: Is There an Objective Definition?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yaqout
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the complexities of defining terrorism, highlighting the subjective nature of the term. Participants argue that terrorism involves the intentional harm of civilians to further a cause, while others differentiate between terrorism and guerrilla warfare. The conversation emphasizes the challenges in establishing an objective definition due to varying interpretations influenced by political and cultural contexts. Ultimately, the discourse reveals that while definitions exist, they are often contested and manipulated by different groups.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the term "terrorism" and its implications in international law.
  • Familiarity with guerrilla warfare tactics and their distinction from terrorism.
  • Knowledge of the Geneva Convention and its relevance to unconventional warfare.
  • Awareness of political and cultural influences on the perception of terrorism.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the legal definitions of terrorism in international law.
  • Explore the differences between terrorism and guerrilla warfare tactics.
  • Study the implications of the Geneva Convention on unconventional warfare practices.
  • Investigate the role of political narratives in shaping public perceptions of terrorism.
USEFUL FOR

Scholars, political scientists, and anyone interested in the legal and ethical implications of terrorism and warfare definitions.

  • #31
Originally posted by Evo
(SNIP)[/color] But I can't agree with the unecesssary taking of lives. (SNoP)[/color]
Neither do 'they'...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Originally posted by master_coda
What if they only struck at the Pentagon?
With a missile or a civilian airliner? Missile no, civilian airliner yes.
I think the World Trade Center towers are perfectly logical millitary targets.
How do you figure?

It is bizarre to see people on a science board arguing against the existence of an objective definition of something. With all the threads here on the Geneva Convention and the actions of the US military being under such a microscope, I have a hard time accepting that this thread even exists. Its such a contradiction.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Originally posted by russ_watters
With a missile or a civilian airliner? Missile no, civilian airliner yes.
How do you figure?

It is bizarre to see people on a science board arguing against the existence of an objective definition of something. With all the threads here on the Geneva Convention and the actions of the US military being under such a microscope, I have a hard time accepting that this thread even exists. Its such a contradiction.
I guess you'll just have to learn to live with it, won't you?
 

Similar threads

News Iraqi insurgence Guerrillas or Terrorists?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
News Oxford English Dictionary defines terrorism
  • · Replies 110 ·
4
Replies
110
Views
14K