One of the definitions of terrorism is "the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments".

Given that there has been no formal "Declaration of War" on Afghanistan by the US government, can the US government's systematic use of force (not very different from the use of violence) against some Afghan people resulting in the deaths of Afghan civilians be reasonably classified as terrorism? I think so. What do you think?

If several countries could bring up the issue at the UN and there is an actual vote on it, then that would be excellent for all the innocent people who are in danger on account of the current Bush administration's handling of the situation. The US government will claim self defense and it is very unlikely that any resolution condemning the US will pass in the UN. But, the whole incident is likely to force the US government to act more sanely.

Is this feasible? Can someone (other than me) look into it?

Sincerely,

Aouie

Any definition of terrorism which does not make reference to the terrorists refusal to "fly a flag" is incomplete.

An act of terrorism is not conducted by uniformed troops as a part of an organized military campaign. While those acts may certainly cause terror, that does not make them terroristic acts! They are properly called acts of war. While there has been no formal declaration of war, anyone who thinks we have not begun a war against Afghanistan and Al Queda is putting form over substance.

Shoot, Friday the 13th caused terror for millions of movie goers. That doesn't make it an act or terror!

You seem to be caught up in some 1st year law course

at some left wing liberal law university. Do you not get

what has happened to our country? There are dead people

in PA, DC and NYC.We have been attacked.America was attacked from within......you sound as if you are stuck

in the 60's in some Kom-Ba-Ya time warp. Yeah, lets play

touchy feely with the enemy(Do you get that that would have been a nucleur bomb in NYC given the terrorists means)As

if 5000 dead ok. Naive. Have you even been out of our country? Do you not get we are hated in world...not because of how evil we are but because people do hate. I think you

are either a foreign subversive or a traitor. Please leave

this country!

Your patriotism seems to blind you into a space monkey, ready to sacrifice yourself (or at least your mind) for your country. All those people in the world, they don't hate us just because "they hate", and they're going to hate someone. It's not like we just happen to bear the brunt of hate from millions of people.

No, those people hate us for great reasons. And, there are so many reasons, and so much to them that I can't even pretend to know all of them, let alone list them, but just a few fall under the heading of FOREIGN POLICY.

Our support of the World Bank, and the IMF, both of which turn countries into U.S.-controlled zombies, is very contemptible. The same goes for our support of the WTO. Just in the last 40 years, we have set up innumerable (ok, maybe 15) dictatorships, which were willing to lower living and working conditions for their own people so that our corporations could continue to grow bananas or coffee, or sugar, or supply oil. Get a clue.

So when do we kill enough of the other folks (whomever they may be at the moment) to call the thing even-steven? When do we begin the counting? Should we go back to the Gulf War? Does anyone have the numbers handy?

Meanwhile . . .

Kum-bah-ya, ma lord!

kum-bah-yah!

So you wanna maybe charge the US with acts of terrorism! Well stand in line. Its a long line and I don't know where the end is.

Remember the mining of the Nicarauguan Harbors? Of course you don't. Remember Iran-Contra? Of course you don't. Remember . . . of course you don't. You have selective memory.

As long as the US retains a veto power in the UN Security Council than any actions taken against the US is of no importance. The US is of course the most powerful nation in the world. It doesn't care, it doesn't have to.