SHOULD A 'DEMOCRATIC' STATE RESORT TO THE TACTICS OF THE 'TERRORIST'? Par 2

Of course, there is a need to distinguish between the 'terrorist', real or potential, and the use of terrorism as a political weapons. This is necessarily so, considering the fact that the state or government, will and does uses the weapons of terrorism to pursue its own objectives,when it considers it expedient to do so.. When Israel invaded Gaza on the last occasion, who can deny that, doing so in the manner in which it did, would have terrorised large if not every part of the population? We can multiply this example to include all wars - whether or not they were seen as 'legitimate' ones - as acts of terror and there fore as a way of terrorising the innocent populations caught up in them. It would have been the case when the Americans invaded Iraq in 2003, eg, and when the western coalition invaded Libya, when Saudi Arabia and its coalition began their on-going bombing against the Yemenis, and when the French went into Mali. Terrorism, whether perpetrated ...