• kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 seconds ago

      Its wildly overused though isnt it. Anyone can say almost anything and claim its political.

    • Fleur_@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      “Different definitions of terrorism emphasize its randomness, its aim to instill fear, and its broader impact beyond its immediate victims.”

      From the article you cited

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Well then define non-combatants. The person he shot was at fault for hundreds if not thousands of deaths. Saying he didn’t personally do them would be like saying a general is not responsible for their troops actions.

      • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Well then define non-combatants.

        “a person who is not engaged in fighting during a war, especially a civilian, chaplain, or medical practitioner.”

        Sure he was responsible for deaths due to denying health coverage. But he’s still a civilian.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          So it was a civilian on civilian kill. Not a militant group/gang/mercenary.

          If the “battle” was pertaining to healthcare denials, he was currently battling and his group took up battle after he was gone.

          • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            39 minutes ago

            The perpetrator of an act of terrorism isn’t part of the definition. They need not be affiliated with a group or military.

            I find it curious how many people on Lemmy were gleefully posting about CEOs and billionaires being scared because of this attack, and then to see push-back about the label of terrorism (where fear is part of the outcome, hence the name).

            The saying is “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” right?