In what ways is domestic terrorism functionally different than international terrorism?
409808
The obvious answer is because one operates from within and one from without. I think that your real query is that of motivations. The international are the age old bandits that have always existed. The real internal terrorists are a whole different thing, they can have many motivators and in all cases should not have been allowed to progress to action. The problem that generated them should be tended to in a sustainable manner not a stop gap, and not later, that's what has us here in the first place. Balance is not an option just ask nature, she is answering us now, but the evil sing to distract and take the last on the plate.
551768
As "one man's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter" I suspect that it depends more on your point of view than any 'fact'.\n\nPeace out
491208
A terrorist for someone is a freedom fighter for other. It actually depends on which side you are. Yes you are right there is no difference between a marine killing a civilian and a terrorist killing a civilian.
737244
Not really. In fact, the current occupation of Iraq doesn't have anything to do with the reason we went over in the first place.\n\nWe're doing nothing more than baby-sitting the country, and acting as its local police force, while it's in the middle of a civil war. There is no evidence, none, that says anything we're doing there has any effect on global terrorism. It's purely politics and empire-building.
434814
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. \nWhether guerilla tactics are evil depends on whether we use them against others or whether they are used against us. \nAt one point in time American settlers were considered terrorists against the English crown, and Israel was helped into existance by Mossad, then considered terrorists by the English (again), for killing civilians and bombing buildings in order to create the Jewish homeland.\nI believe that the press coverage of Iraq and terrorism tends to use the word "terrorism" a bit too liberally. A lot of attacks against American troups are doubtlessly perfomed by "real" terrorists a.k.a. al Quaida, people that are not fighting FOR anything but rather AGAINST everything, against America and the West to be exact. Many of them aren't Iraqis but muslim secretly brought into the country and trained in geuerilla warfare, as terrorist, to be used, if possible, somewhere else later. \nOn the other hand there are insurgents, probably more everyones idea of freedom fighters. They fight FOR a free Iraq (whatever they mean with this). They are Iraquis and they feel their cuntry has been invaded, and they bloody well want to do something about it. Calling them terrorists seems a stretch.
240839
Terrorist do not want to rule the world. They just want to rule their part of it. \n\nTerrorist have an "us" vs "them" view. They do not like an foriegn occupational force in their homeland. \n\nThey are looking for the anwser to this main question:\n\nHow do we get those assholes off our land?
764305
Terrorism doesn't threaten our COUNTRY. Only the President's misguided actions in rolling back civil liberties and abandoning our national principles threatens our COUNTRY.\n\nTerrorism threatens individuals and property. \n\nConservatives have totally lost sight of the reality of the situation.
1139072
Terrorism:\n\nacts perpetrated by terrorists, i.e., those who target civilians indiscriminately for the purpose of intimidation.\n\nFreedom fighter:\n\nOne who wages war against a government which is oppressing his/her people, but does not target civilians.
1000882
Yes, but slowly I think. Terrorism has no nationality or religion or race. However, the media has the power to misrepresent events, and when all we hear about are Muslim terrorists, it breeds the myth that Muslim = terrorist. However, some people view the actions of the israeli Gov, or even the British and American Gov. as terrorists actions. So, I dont think that intelligent, well informed members of the public believe that Muslims are terrorists, just that we are living in religious conflicts.
256746
NATIONALIST TERRORISM: \nNationalist terrorists seek to form a separate state for their own national group, often by drawing attention to a fight for “national liberation” that they think the world has ignored. This sort of terrorism has been among the most successful at winning international sympathy and concessions. Experts say that nationalist terror groups have tended to calibrate their use of violence, using enough to rivet world attention but not so much that they alienate supporters abroad or members of their base community. Nationalist terrorism can be difficult to define, since many groups accused of the practice insist that they are not terrorists but freedom fighters. Examples of nationalist terrorist groups include the Irish Republican Army and the Palestine Liberation Organization, both of which said during the 1990s that they had renounced terrorism. Other prominent examples are the Basque Fatherland and Liberty, which seeks to create a Basque homeland separate from Spain, and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which seeks to create a Kurdish state independent from Turkey. \n\nRELIGIOUS TERRORISM: \nReligious terrorists seek to use violence to further what they see as divinely commanded purposes, often targeting broad categories of foes in an attempt to bring about sweeping changes. Religious terrorists come from many major faiths, as well as from small cults. Nearly half of the 56 known, active international terrorist groups were religiously motivated. Because religious terrorists are concerned not with rallying a constituency of fellow nationalists or ideologues but with pursuing their own vision of the divine will, they lack one of the major constraints that historically has limited the scope of terror attacks, experts say. Examples include Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network, the Palestinian Sunni Muslim organization Hamas and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah\n\nSTATE-SPONSORED TERRORISM: \nState-sponsored terrorist groups are deliberately used by radical states as foreign policy tools as “a cost-effective way of waging war covertly, through the use of surrogate warriors or ‘guns for hire.’” One important early case was the Iranian government’s use of supposedly independent young militants to seize hostages at the American embassy in Tehran in 1979. With enhanced resources at their disposal, state-sponsored terrorist groups are often capable of carrying out more deadly attacks than other terrorists, including airplane bombings.\n\nLEFT-WING TERRORISM: \nLeft-wing terrorists are out to destroy capitalism and replace it with a communist or socialist regime. Because they see most civilians as suffering from capitalist exploitation, left-wing terrorists sometimes have limited their use of violence to avoid hurting the victims they say they want to save. Left-wing terrorists sometimes focus instead on such tactics as kidnapping tycoons or bombing monuments. Examples are the Baader-Meinhof Group (Germany), the Japanese Red Army, the Weathermen (1970s America), and the Red Brigades (Italy).\n\nRIGHT-WING TERRORISM: \nRight-wing terrorists are among the least organized terrorists, often associated with neo-Nazi street rioting in Western Europe, especially in the early 1980s. These groups, often dominated by skinheads, seek to do away with liberal democratic governments and create fascist states in their place. Neofascist terrorists frequently attack immigrants and refugees from the developing world and are both racist and antisemitic. \n\nANARCHIST TERRORISM: \nFrom the 1870s until about 1920, anarchist terrorism was a major global phenomenon. Revolutionaries seeking to overthrow established governments launched a wave of bombings and assassinated a series of heads of state; one such victim was President William McKinley, killed in 1901 by a young Hungarian refugee influenced by anarchist sentiments. Some experts see signs of a new interest in anarchist violence arising out of the recent wave of protes
60082
First off terrorism is not limited to Muslims and all Muslims are not terrorist.  The Irish Republican Army = terrorist, school yard bullies = terrorist, Gangs & Mafias = terrorist.  Now that that misconception is clear.  Let's talk terrorism.  \n\nI don't think what you have mentioned is a possible cause of terrorism because I witness the same thing happen right here in the US anytime I go to the store.  Kids running wild and the parents not doing anything about it.   There are so many spoiled brats in America it's rediculous.  \n\nFor example, Nicole Ritchie and Paris Hilton one could assume that they, "are never told they are wrong, that they are spoiled into getting what they want, ... (throw) childish tantrums... because they have never been made to grow up.", yet we don't see them crashing airplanes into buildings.
1042231
terrorism is a word was called by the west for all what is against america and what america and israel wanna do. so it is so hard thesedays to distinguish between who fights for freedom and who has the hobby of killing people!!\nlet me ask u a question now myself... if u were sitting peacefully in ur house and suddenly a stranger jumped from the window and tried to kick u out of ur house, the house that u love all ur life, so as a corresponding action u brought a gun and killed him or injured him to defence ur house and urself, who is the terrorist?? u or the stranger?
261091
Terrorism, is a hype to only replaced the Cold War. We have built a war economy since the first World War. Without a threat of another there is no justification in continuing the war machine we have created. Also it is just another hype to continue to take away America's freedoom.
1104726
The United States and the United Kingdom are among the most prosperous nations in the world, making them attactive targets for terrorists.  Additionally, because they have been steadfast in the Global War on Terror, they are more likely to be attacked for maintaining that position, and terrorists are more likely to try to scare citizens of those countries.  Therefore, the US and the UK have been more aggressive than most other nations in monitoring potential terrorist activities in other countries.
173009
domestic occurs within the borders of a specific country.  International occurs between different countries
109813
According to the dictionary, a terrorist is "One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism."\n\nTerrorism is defined as "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."\n\nAccording to these definitions, there are members of PETA who do qualify for the terrorist label. That being said, unless the organazation supports and condones these activities, the organazation itself is not a terrorist organization.
74042
One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant. The use of a civilian disguise while on operations exempts the perpetrator from protection under the Geneva Conventions, and consequently if captured they are liable for prosecution as common criminals.\nwww.aeroflight.co.uk/definitions.htm\n\n\nhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:Terrorist\n\nThe exact definition of terrorism is highly controversial. According to one of the primary working definitions, it is the unconventional use of violence against civilians for political gain. It is a strategy of using coordinated attacks that fall outside the laws of war commonly understood to represent the bounds of conventional warfare (see also unconventional warfare).