My Definition of "Terrorism"
My Definition of "Terrorism"
There is no denying fact that some today-used words are so difficult to give a precise definition and still ambiguous. Such ambiguity sometimes leads to widely arguments and finally becomes a controversial issue throughout the world. “Terrorism” is a good example for this point. Its exact definition has been worldwide debated for a long time. The importance to exactly define “terrorism” is that this word and its definition can affect the responses of government to people who conducted “terrorism”, or even affect the international policy and relationships. For example, if people who committed crime were judged to be “terrorists”, the sentence for their guilty might be much stronger than usual; therefore, it is very important to define “terrorism” precisely.
“Terrorism” has been defined in various ways. In my perspective, “terrorism” is the term used to describe the use or threat of action of an individual, a group, or even a country against another country, its institutions, or its people with intentions to influence a government, to damage social structures or to intimidate the public for a political, economic, religious, or ideological cause. The action involved includes serious violence against people or danger to life, a serious risk to public health or safety, or serious damage to property, including a wide range of specific crime, such as murder, kidnapping, seizing public transport, releasing contaminating substances, and even interfering with computer networks.
Therefore, for my definition of “terrorism”, one of the most significant criteria is the intention to commit any actions. If an individual commit crime without his intention, he could not be considered as a “terrorist”. Also, whether or not there were media, the action could be “terrorism” because, in my opinion, media just play their roles in informing what has been happening. If some people intend to attack on government or destroy the national sustainability, they should be classified terrorists even though media have not been reported any events. Moreover, in this modern era, an individual could commit crime by using a computer. He could conduct terrorism in cyber world by releasing computer virus with intentions to destroy or damage public computer system. Such action should be notified as terrorism as well.
Moreover, we should distinguish between attacks on civilians and on members of the security forces. Any wars which are the fighting between military forces of two or more countries in which soldiers of each other are targeted, not civilians, should not be included in the definition of “terrorism”. Applying this criterion to the Middle East, Yasser Arafat’s security forces firing on Israeli soldiers would not be terrorism, whereas a suicide bomber on a bus and a market leaving many civilians injured and killed would without-a-doubt be.
To summarize, “terrorism” can be defined as the actions of an individual, a group, or a country with its intentions to destroy civilians or the public institutions via any way, including computer network with or without media.
“Terrorism” has been defined in various ways. In my perspective, “terrorism” is the term used to describe the use or threat of action of an individual, a group, or even a country against another country, its institutions, or its people with intentions to influence a government, to damage social structures or to intimidate the public for a political, economic, religious, or ideological cause. The action involved includes serious violence against people or danger to life, a serious risk to public health or safety, or serious damage to property, including a wide range of specific crime, such as murder, kidnapping, seizing public transport, releasing contaminating substances, and even interfering with computer networks.
Therefore, for my definition of “terrorism”, one of the most significant criteria is the intention to commit any actions. If an individual commit crime without his intention, he could not be considered as a “terrorist”. Also, whether or not there were media, the action could be “terrorism” because, in my opinion, media just play their roles in informing what has been happening. If some people intend to attack on government or destroy the national sustainability, they should be classified terrorists even though media have not been reported any events. Moreover, in this modern era, an individual could commit crime by using a computer. He could conduct terrorism in cyber world by releasing computer virus with intentions to destroy or damage public computer system. Such action should be notified as terrorism as well.
Moreover, we should distinguish between attacks on civilians and on members of the security forces. Any wars which are the fighting between military forces of two or more countries in which soldiers of each other are targeted, not civilians, should not be included in the definition of “terrorism”. Applying this criterion to the Middle East, Yasser Arafat’s security forces firing on Israeli soldiers would not be terrorism, whereas a suicide bomber on a bus and a market leaving many civilians injured and killed would without-a-doubt be.
To summarize, “terrorism” can be defined as the actions of an individual, a group, or a country with its intentions to destroy civilians or the public institutions via any way, including computer network with or without media.
posted by Rit @ Wednesday, November 08, 2006
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home