| Revision as of 05:54, 29 September 2004 editDoug Danner (talk | contribs)410 edits →Conscription← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:30, 29 September 2004 edit undoShorne (talk | contribs)2,809 edits →ConscriptionNext edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| Also, the 'facts' are blatant NPOV violation - ''far more deadly'' is based on what facts exactly? In the 'Chomsky' newspeak State Terrorism refers only to right-wing militias sponsered by any non-leftist government, while purposely ignoring that most left-wing militants and terrorists had massive state sponsorship from Soviet client-states such as Cuba, Syria, Egypt, East-Germany, etc. ] Sep 29 05:51:26 UTC 2004 | Also, the 'facts' are blatant NPOV violation - ''far more deadly'' is based on what facts exactly? In the 'Chomsky' newspeak State Terrorism refers only to right-wing militias sponsered by any non-leftist government, while purposely ignoring that most left-wing militants and terrorists had massive state sponsorship from Soviet client-states such as Cuba, Syria, Egypt, East-Germany, etc. ] Sep 29 05:51:26 UTC 2004 | ||
| :I'll delete that paragraph. I agree that it cannot be salvaged. As for conscription, shouldn't it be called corvée labour rather than terrorism? ] 07:30, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:30, 29 September 2004
Previous discussions:
207.173.205.13 added this text under "Examples of Terrorism" but I removed it because it seemed out of place and not worded appropriately. Perhaps someone with experience editing this article can add the material if appropriate. — SimonEast 11:42, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- "(not to mention the revelations a few months back when Jordanian authorities arrested numerous terrorists who were intending to kill over 3,000 people in the Jordanian capital of Amman by attacking government buildings and the such with massive explosive-laden trucks)"
- Yeah, I saw that and almost removed it myself. Seems like a non sequitur. Isomorphic 03:29, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I removed the just-added "Kinds of terrorism" section. The article used to have extensive detail on kinds of terrorism. Now that material is in other articles and accessible from the sidebar, so there's really no need to have it in the main article. Isomorphic 14:55, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Washington and the ETA
- The means used to achieve any goal should be placed within the context of what means were actually possible. For instance, the American revolutionaries led by George Washington who fought against the British in the 18th century were not terrorists because violent revolution was the only means possible for change in their circumstances, while modern day Basque organization ETA are terrorists because peaceful means for change are possible within the EU.
This is monstrous. What "peaceful means for change … within the EU are open to the ETA? It seems to me that their position is comparable to that of Washington's revolutionaries.
I have altered this paragraph.
Shorne 23:48, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I think a main point being missed is observing the targets and methods being used. Attacks against an adversary military/quasi-military force isn't considered terrorism, but rather militancy. The idea being that militancy is a military form of opposition. In contrast to American Revolutionaries who fought the British military, ETA frequently attacks non-military targets. As such ETA is a terrorist organization, while the former are not. Random attacks in shopping malls intended to terrify civilians and the murder of judges is hardly the same.
Doug Mon Jun 28 04:50:50 UTC 2004
Conscription
- State-sponsored terrorist attacks on their "own" civilian populations are far more deadly and can be sustained for longer durations. Stalin's pre World War II purges and the 1960s "cultural revolution" in China two conventional examples. Conscripton is also state sponsored terrorism. The "support" for the government extracted by the military is of the most direct and personal kind. The casualties among the innocent conscripted civilians in both world wars dwarfs that of all other weapons of mass destruction.
It's not clear whether this paragraph can be salvaged at all, but in particular the part beginning with "Conscription..." seems to evade NPOV (at the very least).
--
Also, the 'facts' are blatant NPOV violation - far more deadly is based on what facts exactly? In the 'Chomsky' newspeak State Terrorism refers only to right-wing militias sponsered by any non-leftist government, while purposely ignoring that most left-wing militants and terrorists had massive state sponsorship from Soviet client-states such as Cuba, Syria, Egypt, East-Germany, etc. Doug Sep 29 05:51:26 UTC 2004
- I'll delete that paragraph. I agree that it cannot be salvaged. As for conscription, shouldn't it be called corvée labour rather than terrorism? Shorne 07:30, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)