1) Describe some of the issues associated with defining and applying the concept of state terrorism.
State terrorism is hard to define as the definition is blurry, and the concept is vague. An issue that is associated with it is the definition. State terrorism could either mean that the state harbours terrorists, or that it funds terrorists. Because of this, it is hard to define what state terrorism really is and which classifications are needed to apply this concept. Another issue to do with this is that some states are stronger than others and can control what they are defined as. Because of this, powerful states could be supporting more terrorism and killing more innocent people than the other states they are accusing without getting …show more content…
They did this by implementing a totalitarian regime, which is where a leader has complete domination over their society. A tactic used were the special police who took down groups that were considered unreliable and unwanted. They used terrorism through police, military forces, and semi-autonomous, right-wing groups known as ‘death squads. Idi Amin’s methods were very similar to those of Hitler and Stalin as he also used military forces to remove anyone who oppose him, like the other two did. He was also responsible for a large amount of death, however not as many as Hitler and Stalin.
4) Given the information presented in the previous pages and your own interpretations, is it fair to apply the label ‘terrorist’ to state bodies, or does there need to be a different term/concept?
Terrorism is already hard to define, however state terrorism is still violence and can be considered terrorism even though it is against their own people. It would not be necessary to apply new labels and create a different concept and term, however it would make defining state terrorism a lot easier if it was changed. It would also make it easier to distinguish between internal and external
State terrorism is hard to define as the definition is blurry, and the concept is vague. An issue that is associated with it is the definition. State terrorism could either mean that the state harbours terrorists, or that it funds terrorists. Because of this, it is hard to define what state terrorism really is and which classifications are needed to apply this concept. Another issue to do with this is that some states are stronger than others and can control what they are defined as. Because of this, powerful states could be supporting more terrorism and killing more innocent people than the other states they are accusing without getting …show more content…
They did this by implementing a totalitarian regime, which is where a leader has complete domination over their society. A tactic used were the special police who took down groups that were considered unreliable and unwanted. They used terrorism through police, military forces, and semi-autonomous, right-wing groups known as ‘death squads. Idi Amin’s methods were very similar to those of Hitler and Stalin as he also used military forces to remove anyone who oppose him, like the other two did. He was also responsible for a large amount of death, however not as many as Hitler and Stalin.
4) Given the information presented in the previous pages and your own interpretations, is it fair to apply the label ‘terrorist’ to state bodies, or does there need to be a different term/concept?
Terrorism is already hard to define, however state terrorism is still violence and can be considered terrorism even though it is against their own people. It would not be necessary to apply new labels and create a different concept and term, however it would make defining state terrorism a lot easier if it was changed. It would also make it easier to distinguish between internal and external