Ukrainian terrorism

[pecksniff]

There isn't any going on yet -- but there are many ethnic Ukrainians in Russia, some of them no doubt sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause. And some of those might start planting bombs in Moscow and St. Petersburg. With or without the knowledge or complicity of the Ukrainian government.

If the U.S. is still backing Ukraine at that time, the Russians will accuse us of "supporting terrorism."

And how do we answer? With "Your terrorists are our freedom fighters" or some such bullshit?

It would undermine the credibility of America's globally public commitment since 9/11 not to tolerate terrorism in any form by any actor.

 

[oggbashan]

Putin is a terrorist, attacking a country that did not threaten him or his country.

If Ukrainians attack in Russia it is Putin's fault and a legitimate war tactic. That is NOT terrorism.

 

[pecksniff]

Putin is a terrorist, attacking a country that did not threaten him or his country.

Military aggression is not the same thing as terrorism. Terrorism is defined by certain tactics, not by its political goals. Car-bombing is terrorism no matter who does it or why.

Guerilla warfare is not quite the same thing as terrorism either, but in that case the line between the two is blurry and hard to fix, and there are many circumstances in which guerillas can plausibly be called terrorists. We'd better be prepared for that possibility too -- not in Moscow, but in Ukraine proper, where people are already stockpiling such guerilla/terrorist weapons as Molotov cocktails.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Military aggression is not the same thing as terrorism. Terrorism is defined by certain tactics, not by its political goals. Car-bombing is terrorism no matter who does it or why.

The u.s. is the biggest money provider for terrorism around the world. Just look at israel.

 

[jomar]

We reply “You’re the terrorist!” Punctuated by a raspberry.

 

[pecksniff]

We reply “You’re the terrorist!” Punctuated by a raspberry.

That ain't gonna help, as far as America's anti-terrorism cred goes.

 

[oggbashan]

So if Ukraine was able to bomb Moscow from the air, that wouldn't be terrorism? But if they bombed Moscow from the ground, that would be? What an odd definition.

When invaded by an enemy, any response is legitimate. Petrol bombs against Russian tanks? That is desperation, not terrorism.

 

[pecksniff]

So if Ukraine was able to bomb Moscow from the air, that wouldn't be terrorism? But if they bombed Moscow from the ground, that would be? What an odd definition.

Nevertheless, it does seem to be the prevailing definition internationally.

 

[oggbashan]

Nevertheless, it does seem to be the prevailing definition internationally.

And what were American SOE people doing in France in WW2?

 

[JohnnySavage]

For it to be terrorism, it has to be unlawful. I don't think Ukraine is legally required to sit back and take a beating. War was declared against THEM.

 

[Dribble]

Peck is in denial. WW3 started over a decade ago. You either repeat history...or learn from your mistakes. Pretending it isn't happening will only result in more violence

 

[pecksniff]

Peck is in denial. WW3 started over a decade ago.

What, with the invasion of Crimea?