Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway9728 | Hacker News Reader

And let us not forget the endless string of assassinations carried out by foreign intelligence agencies against Iranian nuclear scientists [0][1][2][3][4], indiscriminately killing civilians – women and children.

Of course, we as a nation are so overwhelmingly vilified by US media that such tragedies happening to us don't get awarded the label of "Terrorism."

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majid_Shahriari [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fereydoon_Abbasi [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoud_Alimohammadi [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darioush_Rezaeinejad [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostafa_Ahmadi-Roshan

View on HN

I'm certainly no fan of the CIA and the fucked up shit it's done (and still doing), especially to your country. But isn't there a difference between a somewhat targeted assassination and an attack which's only target is maximum civillian damage (aka the typical terror bomb plot)? I don't want to justify these actions, I just think there is a qualitative difference.

Sure, there's a difference. There's also a difference between first and second degree murder, but they are both still murder.

From what I can tell, most terrorists want to achieve a more specific goal than just to maximize civilian damage. Here are some groups which are called terrorist organizations:

Earth Liberation Front: carries out property damage related to fur farming, meat packing, GMO research, logging, etc.

Army of God, a Christian anti-abortionist group: kidnapped a doctor who performed abortions, and his wife, murdered or attempted to murder abortion providers, and carried out clinic bombings and arson.

In both cases the goal was to increase the perceived costs of respectively exploiting the environment and carrying out abortions.

What is the difference between a targeted murder of a foreign scientists by the CIA and a targeted murder of an abortion provider?

(I use "murder" because I think "assassination" is a fancy name partially meant to justify murder as an aspect of state power.)

Thank you, good points. It is probably more of a spectrum than I previously stated. Though I'd personally also wouldn't call the ELF or Army of God terrorist organizations. That I'd reserve for untargeted civillian attacks that have the intent of striking fear. But given that the US government considers these organizations terrorist, it's only fair to call their CIA a terrorist organization.

One problem is that "terrorism" is not well defined.

If you use the definition "untargeted civillian attacks", then that excludes the 9/11 attacks. As I understand it, the targets were: the World Trade center, as a symbol of US economic power, the Pentagon as the center of US military power, and flight 93 was headed towards DC, so perhaps the Capital building or the White House, as an attack on political power.

The goals of those who planned and carried out 9/11 was not simply to strike fear. "Al-Qaeda and bin Laden cited U.S. support of Israel, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, and sanctions against Iraq as motives."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com