Hacker News Reader

If it were well defined, there wouldn't be any debate on it. And no one is interested in your designated definition.

The only valid definition is: "terrorism is anything I don't like"

This is why Republicans called it a "terrorist fist bump"

It's not "my designated" definition. It's the one in the dictionary. And my implication was that even when I or you agree with the goals of an organization, when what they're doing is "terrorizing" people, then they are terrorists.

I know it's uncomfortable to think that we might side with the terrorists, god knows we've been conditioned by countless hours in counter-strike to think they're the bad guys, but sometimes that's what we feel, and we should make peace with that. It's OK to agree with the goals, but disagree with the means.

[flagged]

Massacres are legitimate military tactics? Do military tactics include atrocities?

Please don't comment in the flamewar style on Hacker news. We want HN to be a place where people can discuss difficult topics, but that requires people to heed the guidelines and comment respectfully. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

There isnt a debate. Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Again,, please don’t normalize the US government’s viewpoint.

The vast majority of the world says they’re freedom fighters.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com