How does civil war create opportunities for terrorist groups?

[Holladay]

NOT the Crimean War, this time.

Again, another daughter college discussion...

Define civil war. Define terrorist.

My thoughts, our civil war or in general? Is terrorist same as guerrilla warfare? If it is in general and guerrilla, thus the best form of warfare with limited assets is guerrilla. Why a civil war? In that case, the balance of assets would be close to the same (unless backed another power).

[Rasputin]

I think this is best answered for you in the DC forum.

[cosmo20002]

NOT the Crimean War, this time.

Again, another daughter college discussion...

Define civil war. Define terrorist.

My thoughts, our civil war or in general? Is terrorist same as guerrilla warfare? If it is in general and guerrilla, thus the best form of warfare with limited assets is guerrilla. Why a civil war? In that case, the balance of assets would be close to the same (unless backed another power).

pics

[Bugeater]

It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.

[listopencil]

Civil war is combat between two (or more) sections of the same society, marked by military attacks on assets and personnel that were considered part of the same system prior to the action. A terrorist primarily attacks to create fear and confusion in order to disrupt the society that it opposes. Terrorist action as opposed to standard military action can be differentiated by determining the primary targets of the attacks.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

A terrorist is defined by the institutional power structure. George Washington was a terrorist to the British Empire.

[Shaid]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[Prison Bitch]

A terrorist is defined by the institutional power structure. George Washington was a terrorist to the British Empire.

Id argue he was considered a traitor.

[alnorth]

A civil war implies a very large group of citizens who are organized and armed under a commander and sometimes a shadow government. Civilian casualties are acceptable when unavoidable, but at least some basic attempt is made to avoid them when possible while fulfilling their goal to attack the existing government.

Terrorists imply a smaller group of fanatics (especially if they are not citizens, outsiders are almost always terrorists) who really don't care much about civilian casualties. Often, terrorists don't believe there are very many innocents; if you aren't resisting the government, then you are the enemy, and there is no neutrality.

It can be hard to draw the line between large, organized structure, and focus on the government vs smaller, loosely organized or cell-based, and little or no concern for the concept of neutrality.

Our own history is clear, its hard to argue that the confederates were terrorists even back in the day.

[Holladay]

Thanks for the help.

The definition of terrorism in our textbook is: the use or threatened use of violence against noncombatant targets by individuals or nonstate groups for political ends.

Thus in the case of a civil war which would match brother vs brother, friends v friends etc, terrorist activities would include, as an example women and children. Those strike the heart of any fighting man, thus the flames of war would burn brighter and possibly a more effective strategy to achieve those political ends.

Thing better then to capture your cousins' daughter. He would do anything to make sure she isn't harmed. If you whack her, he will do anything to harm you, to include some nice torture before the end. That might include your daughter.