u/Unlikely_Analyst_313

The concept of "terrorism" is not a coherent ethical category but an empty political construct.

This hypocrisy is exposed by a direct comparison: the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Al-Qaeda’s attacks on September 11th.

Both acts followed the same logic: using mass civilian death to generate terror and force political surrender. Yet one is called "tragic necessity," the other "terrorism." The difference is not the act, but who defines it.

They will come up with excuses for why America did not commit terrorism. "America is a state actor." As if, if Al Qaeda had captured territory and become a state, and then carried out the exact same attack, they would say it's not terrorism anymore, simply because they were a state. Even though America itself has multiple state actors on its list of terrorist organizations.

“America murdered civilians in a declared war so it’s not terrorism.” As if declaring a war and then doing a terrorist attack makes it no longer a terrorist attack.

"It was a military necessity." As if a terrorist organization cannot think that a terrorist attack is necessary.

"It was a response to aggression, not unprovoked." As if who started it matters and as if 9/11 was random and not also provoked by the actions of Americans in the middle east.

And many of them will make these excuses endlessly until they get tired and resort to a personal attack. In reality, no matter how much they dislike it, they start a new war every one or two years and bomb civilians to death for their political goals, destroying houses, hospitals, schools, and more, so that the country they are attacking submits to their demands. They are the biggest tyrants on earth, and any condemnation of any other group from their mouths is meaningless and a distraction.

The concept of "terrorism" is not a coherent ethical category but an empty political construct.

This hypocrisy is exposed by a direct comparison: the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Al-Qaeda’s attacks on September 11th.

Both acts followed the same logic: using mass civilian death to generate terror and force political surrender. Yet one is called "tragic necessity," the other "terrorism." The difference is not the act, but who defines it.

They will come up with excuses for why America did not commit terrorism. "America is a state actor." As if, if Al Qaeda had captured territory and become a state, and then carried out the exact same attack, they would say it's not terrorism anymore, simply because they were a state. Even though America itself has multiple state actors on its list of terrorist organizations.

“America murdered civilians in a declared war so it’s not terrorism.” As if declaring a war and then doing a terrorist attack makes it no longer a terrorist attack.

"It was a military necessity." As if a terrorist organization cannot think that a terrorist attack is necessary.

"It was a response to aggression, not unprovoked." As if who started it matters and as if 9/11 was random and not also provoked by the actions of Americans in the middle east.

And many of them will make these excuses endlessly until they get tired and resort to a personal attack. In reality, no matter how much they dislike it, they start a new war every one or two years and bomb civilians to death for their political goals, destroying houses, hospitals, schools, and more, so that the country they are attacking submits to their demands. They are the biggest tyrants on earth, and any condemnation of any other group from their mouths is meaningless and a distraction.