jackehammond
Active member
[Note - To American members: Let's try and keep the hyper emotions out of this debate and discusses this rationally - Jack a US Citizen]
Folks,
About a year or two after the truck sucide bombing of the Marine HQ in Lebanon there was a discussion in USNI Proceedings the largest publication in the US for member of the US Navy and Marines (ie also one of the oldest US military publications). The authors in an article asked a hard question: Was the attack and bombing of the Marine HQ that killed over 200 Marines "an act of terrorism"?
To the surprise of a lot of people, many USN and USMC officers wrote back and stated "No it was not an act of terrorism. It was an act of war by Syria and Iran and should be treated as such."
That article stated two items that if either was present could not make it an act of terrorism: 1. The purpose of the targeting is to kill combatants or 2. lawful combatants. To wit, an "act of terrorism" has to be done by unlawful combatants and the targeting has to be the sole purpose of the killing of innocent unoffending civilians. Lawful combatants can though commit war crimes and war atrocities. But not "acts of terrorism".
This brings the question of the poll: Was the 9/11 crash of the airliner by AQ into the Pentagon an "act of terrorism"?
Jack E. Hammond
Folks,
About a year or two after the truck sucide bombing of the Marine HQ in Lebanon there was a discussion in USNI Proceedings the largest publication in the US for member of the US Navy and Marines (ie also one of the oldest US military publications). The authors in an article asked a hard question: Was the attack and bombing of the Marine HQ that killed over 200 Marines "an act of terrorism"?
To the surprise of a lot of people, many USN and USMC officers wrote back and stated "No it was not an act of terrorism. It was an act of war by Syria and Iran and should be treated as such."
That article stated two items that if either was present could not make it an act of terrorism: 1. The purpose of the targeting is to kill combatants or 2. lawful combatants. To wit, an "act of terrorism" has to be done by unlawful combatants and the targeting has to be the sole purpose of the killing of innocent unoffending civilians. Lawful combatants can though commit war crimes and war atrocities. But not "acts of terrorism".
This brings the question of the poll: Was the 9/11 crash of the airliner by AQ into the Pentagon an "act of terrorism"?
Jack E. Hammond