The Drone Wars: Assassinations and ANOTHER definition for Terrorism from the Washington Post

Over at the Washington Post today, Eugene Robinson had this exchange in his weekly Q&A on the Post’s website:

Q.  A war by any other name

The "war on terror" was misnamed at the start. Although I agree that it makes no sense to wage war on a tactic, calling it the war on terror implies that only one side used the tactic. What the jihadists called terrorism, Donald Rumsfeld and others called shock and awe. Drone strikes are a form of terror, as was the attack on Fallujah. Throughout Iraq and Afghanistan there have been similar events specifically designed to strike terror into the hearts of those who resist the American-sponsored invasions. The correct name is and continues to the the war OF terror, and it will not end until both sides renounce the tactic.

·         –

May 28, 2013 9:25 AM

·         Permalink

A.      Eugene Robinson :

I have to disagree. Drone strikes are used by the U.S. as a form of assassination, not terror. The United States is not guilty of terrorism in the same way al-Qaeda is. 

– May 28, 2013 1:31 PM

WTF?  Assassinations, particularly ones that more often then not come with civilian casualties (infamously known as collateral damage) are NOT terrorism?  Is that because a state actor (the U.S. Airforce and or CIA) carries them out?  Really?  SO all those Iraqi government officials killed over the last ten years by guys on motorcycles weren't killed by "terrorists?"  Funny how hte Post got that wrong for a decade.

Look folks, over and over again when captured Muslim “terrorists” ask why they do what they do, they respond with the terrorizing effects of US armed actions in Muslim countries.  To say that killing Muslims from Drone is “just assassination” is like saying . . . I can’t even think of a justification that I’ve heard recently that comes close to this one.

Really Mr. Robinson – given your track record I expect better of you.