Uhm, no, based on your definition not even the official 9/11 story's Al-Quaida would be considered terrorists because they supposedly admitted to what they were doing:

FBI's terrorism definitions:

International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

Encyclopedia Britannica:

terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. Terrorism has been practiced by political organizations with both rightist and leftist objectives, by nationalistic and religious groups, by revolutionaries, and even by state institutions such as armies, intelligence services, and police.

Cambridge:

violent action for political purposes

[–] Hogger85b@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The purpose of felling the two towers was to cause terror and change amaricans political views.

The purpose of felling the Kerch bridge is to stop russian bringing military resources into the Ukraine.

What maybe a difficult point is something like the bombing of ww2 cities like Dresden, Coventry or Hiroshima. Many there were making munitions for Japan so was it.civilian or moltrry

[–] zephyrvs@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Agreed, 9/11 isn't a good example for the topic of the RUS/UKR war. Thanks!

load more comments (26 replies)