Question:
Which can be described as terrorist countries and why? Terrorism is the use of coercive intimidation.?
2007-10-28 02:54:20 UTC
The Oxford English Dictionary defines a terrorist as one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation. Is that also a sufficient definition of a government or country that uses terrorist tactics to achieve its goals?
Four answers:
2007-10-28 07:03:46 UTC
If you really think about it, ALL countries have terrorists in one way or another. Think back through history, haven't we all (including America) done something that could be perceived as terrorism. Think about it, the Holocaust........Pearl Harbor.......dropping the atomic bomb........placing Japanese-Americans into camps.....and these are just some of the well known ones. If you look into the history of every single country, you will even find out that every country has even performed acts of terror against their own people. So, in my opinion, every single country is a "terrorist country."

We're all guilty of the same crimes.
2007-10-28 10:08:15 UTC
terrorism and "the war on terror" are being used in a rather obscure way. It's almost like a markating campaign to promote conflict with the middle east.



"nike - just do it!"

"iraq - War on terror!"



All we need is a logo and a theme tune... it's sick!



By the dictionary deffinition of terrorisim it wouldn't be a stretch to suppose our own US and UK goverments are terrorising their own citizens! Pushing us into ill conceived conflicts, provoking enemies that didn't exsist, creating a climate of fear and intimidation to push profit motivated agendas... not for the common good, but for the benefit of an elite few.



Then look at it all from the perspective of the occupied, or the "liberated"... it's all a sick joke!
2007-10-28 10:05:47 UTC
Nations that get the label "terrorist" are those that supply weapons, training, and financial support to groups or individuals who attempt to kill or main civilians in an effort to achieve political change.
muslim-doctor
2007-10-28 23:03:18 UTC
http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans22.html



by Stephen Gowans



The United States is knowingly violating Article 54 of the Geneva

Convention which prohibits any country from undermining "objects

indispensable to the survival of (another country's) civilian

population," including drinking water installations and supplies, says Thomas Nagy,

a business professor at George Washington University.



Writing in the September 2001 issue of The Progressive, Nagy cites

recently declassified documents that show the United States was aware

of the civilian health consequences of destroying Iraq's drinking water

and sanitation systems in the Gulf War, and knew that sanctions would

prevent the Iraqi government from repairing the degraded facilities.



During the Gulf War, coalition forces bombed Iraq's eight multi-purpose

dams, destroying flood control systems, irrigation, municipal and

industrial water storage, and hydroelectric power. Major pumping

stations were targeted, and municipal water and sewage facilities were

destroyed.



Article 54 of the Geneva Convention prohibits attacks on "drinking

water installations and supplies and irrigation works."



Nagy says that not only did the United States deliberately destroy

drinking water and sanitation facilities, it knew sanctions would

prevent Iraq from rebuilding, and that epidemics would ensue.



One document, written soon after the bombing, warned that sanctions

would prevent Iraq from importing "water treatment replacement parts and some

essential chemicals" leading to "increased incidences, if not

epidemics, of disease."



Another document lists the most likely diseases: "diarrheal diseases

(particularly children); acute respiratory illnesses (colds and

influenza); typhoid; hepatitis A (particularly children); measles,

diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children); meningitis,

including meningococcal (particularly children); cholera (possible, but less

likely.)"



Then U.S. Navy Secretary John Lehman estimated that 200,000 Iraqis died

in the Gulf War, but many more have died since. UNICEF estimates that well

over a million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S-led sanctions

regime, in place for the last decade. Some 500,000 children have died,

and an estimated 4,000 die from various preventable, sanctions-related

diseases, every month, says the U.N. agency.



Despite the massive human toll, the United States continues to support

the sanctions regime, arguing that sanctions won't be lifted until U.N.

inspectors are free to return to Iraq to verify that the country has

rid itself of weapons of mass destruction.



American Scott Ritter, a former U.N. arms inspector, claims that Iraq

is effectively disarmed, and has been for some time.



And deaths from sanctions exceed those from weapons of mass

destruction. Political scientists John and Karl Mueller say that sanctions have

"contributed to more deaths during the post Cold War era than all the

weapons of mass destruction throughout history," including deaths at

Hiroshima and Nagasaki.



At one point, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said

that despite the civilian deaths the sanctions were "worth it."



Meanwhile, Israel, a U.S. ally in the region, is widely believed to

have an arsenal of 200 nuclear weapons. While in violation of countless U.N.

Resolutions ordering its withdrawal from the Occupied Territories,

Israel faces no sanctions and no order to disarm. Amnesty International, which

has warned that Israel's crackdown on the latest Palestinian uprising,

or Intifada, borders on war crimes, recently condemned Tel Aviv for its

"utter disregard for human life in the Occupied Territories" and for

its violations of international law. And yet even calls for intervention as

mild as placing international observers in the Occupied Territories

have been rebuffed.



The Gulf War erupted after Iraq invaded neighboring Kuwait. After the

war, the United Nations imposed sanctions, ordering Iraq to disarm. Iraq's

violation of international law in invading its neighbor was cited for

the harsh treatment. But critics of the policy say that punishment for

violations of international law are being meted out unevenly and

hypocritically. Israel's innumerable transgressions go unpunished,

while governments that have fallen out with Washington, often over investment

or debt repayment issues, are treated severely.



Moreover, say critics, the United States itself has a long track record

of violating international law. Washington's undermining of Iraq's water

treatment and sanitation facilities in violation of the Geneva



Convention is just one of many recent transgressions, including the bombing of

Yugoslavia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the continued bombing of Iraq.



U.S.-led NATO forces also targeted civilian infrastructure in

Yugoslavia. At one point, U.S. Air Force General Michael Short explained that

NATO's bombing campaign was aimed at causing misery in the civilian

population. "If you wake up in the morning," said Short, "and you have no power to

your house and no gas to your stove and the bridge you take to work is

down and will be lying in the Danube for the next 20 years, I think you

begin to ask, 'Hey, Slobo, what's this all about? How much more of this

do we have to withstand?'"



NATO forces used depleted uranium munitions in Yugoslavia, as did

coalition forces in Iraq. Depleted uranium may be toxic, and may be

responsible for an epidemic of cancers and birth defects that have

arisen in Iraq over the last decade. Some have charged that Gulf War syndrome,

a cluster of mysterious and debilitating illnesses suffered by U.S. and

allied soldiers, is related to depleted uranium. Others point to the

contamination of soil, water and air by carcinogenic effluent from

destroyed industrial facilities and chemical plants as being

responsible.



Nagy says that what is most disturbing about the documents is that they

reveal a U.S. government concerned more with the potential negative

publicity of the deaths, than with the deaths themselves. Dealing with

the public relations downside of massive killing is a common theme in U.S.

foreign policy. During the Gulf War a bomb that hit a marketplace and

killed civilians led CBS News correspondent Dan Rather to remark: "We

can be sure that Saddam Hussein will make propaganda of these casualties."

Frequent reference is made in the documents Nagy has uncovered to the

potential for Iraq to use epidemics for propaganda purposes.



When Nagy sent the documents to the media last fall, only two reporters

wrote lengthy articles. One was Felicity Arbuthnot, who wrote in

Scotland's The Sunday Herald that the "US-led allied forces

deliberately destroyed Iraq's water supply during the Gulf War flagrantly breaking

the Geneva Convention and causing thousand of civilian deaths." Despite

the seriousness of the allegations, and their being backed up by official

documents, the story quickly fizzled.



Mr. Steve Gowans is a writer and political activist who lives in

Ottawa, Canada.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...