McCarthyism - erm no Fascism is alive and well

[STING2]

HIPHOP,

So you think the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism? I'd considered it a rather mild reaction to the violation of Colonial rights over the previous 10 years. The Tea Party was a warning to King George and he failed to get the message.

Terrorism in this case prior to the war is better shown in the forced quartering of British soldiers in colonist homes in which place the families were forced to give all or part of their houses and to serve the British soldiers in every way imaginable.

In the case of the Atomic Bomb, the only one being influenced to surrender was the Japanese leadership. US conventional bombing followed by a US invasion in the Spring of 1946 could have potentially wiped out half the Japanese population based on the tactics and reaction of the people when US forces took Okinawa. The US use of the Atomic Bombs in this senerio saved millions of Japanese lives. Because of the effects of a single Bomb, I can see how it is looked at as a terror weapon, but this ignores the fact that most people in Japan died and suffered from conventional bombs, not the two atomic bombs that were dropped.

If one were to define any act of violence as terrorism, then even a women defending herself with violence from being raped could be defined as terrorism. That is just absurd. The goals of the action, who is targeted, how they are targeted, are all factors in determining if a particular action is an act of terrorism.

Its obvious that 9/11 was an act of terrorism. Any action that specifically targets and murders innocent civilians is obviously terrorism.

 

[Ft. Worth Frog]

Hiphop, before you go and make broad statements about the bombs at Hiroshima nd Nagasaki, it would be wiser to take a long hard look at the various details surrounding the dropping of the bombs. By your definition, all war is terrorism, and that is a definition that will not do in reality. In regards to the dropping of the a-bombs, there were few options left in Japan. Any invasion of the home islands would have cost too many lives, both Japanese and American. Just look at the fierce battle for Okinawa, the closest island to Japan. Now compare that tiny island with an invasion of Hohhaido, Kyushu, etc. Now, before military planners even knew about research on the bomb, they were ordered to give estimates on what an invasion might cost in lives. They came up with numbers ranging from 500,000 to 1 million American lives. Keep in mind, this was before these military planners had knowledge of the bomb. Therefore, it can be argued that dropping the bombs saved lives on both sides. War is a sad fact of life on this planet, and all efforts should be made to avert it when possible; it is by no means glorious. However, to have our heads in the sand and use moral relativism in regards to war is extremely faulty.

 

[Sherry Darling]

Keep in mind that the American Revolution started out as terrorist acts against England. The "Boston Tea Party" is a prime example of terrorism. Colonial revolutionaries sneaked aboard an English Tea Merchant Ships, where they threw hundreds if not thousands of dollars worth of tea into the Atlantic Ocean. Americans today think of that incident as a stride to freedom, but the English look at it as the beginning of countless terrorist acts.
[/B]

Hiphop, you know I love ya right? Being my economic justice buddy here and all?

No way I'm gonna let you get away with this. The act you describe *did not involve violence*! Unless you're a teabag, I guess. How can you have terrorism without violence?

SD

 

[diamond]

i think Hiphop was drinking the night of that post..

 

[verte76]

That's right, no one was killed at the Boston Tea Party. It was a very well-done act of political protest, not terrorism. Of course the English didn't like it as it was a protest against their government.