|
|
|
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
|
 |
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
|
|
Apr 2nd, 2010, 03:40 AM
Hang on, I was going to ask:
What if your non-state actor causing a violent act on a non-combatant isn't trying to affect change? What if they are simply doing this act for the sake of it? Say, blowing up a hospital simply for the act of causing terror and panic in the population?
By me, it's terrorism. Causing terror. But if they aren't doing it to affect change with the government or individuals, is it terrorism to you?
|
__________________
| |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
