Pro India US Congressman seeks immediate designation of Pakistan as state sponsor of terrorism

[Imran Khan]

we dont care USA now a days . go to hell USA

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Terrorists are a specific group of people(some would not even call them people) who resort to violent acts to achieve political goals.

You just described what America does across the world every day. In fact, according to their own statistics, they drop a bomb on someone's head every few minutes. And these aren't small bombs either, they fully understand the collateral damage they cause to innocent civilians when they drop them.

 

[MimophantSlayer]

In my response to you I am not alluding to school children.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/...n-civilians-killed-american-soldier-held.html

You specifically mentioned inside the US, this particular incident is not inside the US.

But even so, for this incident at the least my initial definition still stands, Americans disavowed him, the terrorist organisation wouldn't.

You just described what America does across the world every day. In fact, according to their own statistics, they drop a bomb on someone's head every few minutes. And these aren't small bombs either, they fully understand the collateral damage they cause to innocent civilians when they drop them.

True.
But unfortunately for anyone wanting to say otherwise, US is the premier force in the world and they do things more efficiently, rather than just spouting the superiority of their own ideology, killing their own people, violently disturbing the status quo, taking sex slaves and the like.

 

[I.R.A]

You specifically mentioned inside the US, this particular incident is not inside the US.

What is the definition of terrorist then?

You think those war torn Afghans had the capability to do anything outside Afghanistan or the person named Hafiz Saeed has ever set foot in india or US to spread terror?.......... or how about Iraq, it had a ruler and they went to hunt and kill him ....... a legitimate ruler.

 

[MimophantSlayer]

What is the definition of terrorist then?

You think those war torn Afghans had the capability to do anything outside Afghanistan or the person named Hafiz Saeed has ever set foot in india or US to spread terror?.......... or how about Iraq, it had a ruler and they went to hunt and kill him ....... a legitimate ruler.

I have already explained the definition.

A terrorist would be anyone trying to violently change the stay quo in order to achieve political goals and who has the backing of his organisation who want the same; circumventing the democratic process so to speak.

Hafiz Saeed is a terrorist like Osama bin Laden was a terrorist.
Osama might not have personally flown the plane directly onto one of the twin towers but he is still responsible for 9/11 and is hence a terrorist, the same for Saeed and 26/11.

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

Tad Poe wants KSA declared terrorist too and wants all defence contract with them cancelled.

 

[HRK]

Terrorists are a specific group of people(some would not even call them people) who resort to violent acts to achieve political goals.

If this is the definition of "TERRORIST" than every defence forces of every nation exist today is a Terrorist and every political head of the state also fall in this category, further IF we go into history every war and all the participant are terrorist.

Speaking in Indian context Bhagat Singh, Chandra Shekhar Azad and his group including Subhas Chandra Bose etc. are also "TERRORIST"

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

If they declare india a state sponsor we will gladly take the name. Cuz its always tit for tat terror in indo pak conflict. Almost every case. Tit for tat.

We say we will stop if india stops terror. And india says the same. Either both deserve it or both don't.

 

[xyxmt]

Ted poe...what a cute name

only a guy name tadpole can help India

 

[Menace2Society]

Just lobbying backhanders by Indians. Nothing to see here.

 

[MimophantSlayer]

If this is the definition of "TERRORIST" than every defence forces of every nation exist today is a Terrorist and every political head of the state also fall in this category, further IF we go into history every war and all the participant are terrorist.

Speaking in Indian context Bhagat Singh, Chandra Shekhar Azad and his group including Subhas Chandra Bose etc. are also "TERRORIST"

Well freedom fighters for some are terrorists to others.
But let's not muddy the waters here, even though that is the general definition it is not a monolithic definition, we all have common sense we know who terrorists are and how they behave.

Bhagat Singh or even Subhas Chandra Bose didn't legitimise sex slaves, or extorted money from poor villagers, or mass murdered their own people or even crashed a plane onto a civilian infrastructure killing thousands.

Terrorists generally have no qualms attacking non-combatants or even destroying non-strategic infrastructure and no war tactic is barred from use; while legitimate militaries at the least in most of the cases confine the damage to military infrastructures and the military and even vie for signing de-escalatory and disarmament treaties.