Why are we not terrorists?

“Libya 1989 - US bombs capitol Tripoli killing 55 civilians. Calls it collateral damage"

Or

“Sudan 1998 - US bombs Aspirin Factory in Khartoum killing civilians.”

Or

“Afghanistan 1998 - US missiles kill 28 civilians”

Or

“Yugoslavia 1999 - US laser-guided bombs destroy Chinese Embassy in Belgrade killing three Chinese journalists.”

Or

“The United States yesterday admitted its involvement in the assassination of six alleged suspected al-Qaida members in Yemen, saying that a car carrying the suspects was hit by a missile fired by a CIA drone in an attack on Sunday. The decision to carry out such assassinations carries a number of risks, if it is perceived that the US is carrying out such attacks rather than seeking to apprehend suspects - and if people not connected to al-Qaida are killed in the attacks.”

Or

List of countries the U.S. has bombed since World War II

China
Korea
China
Guatemala
Indonesia
Cuba
Guatemala
Vietnam
Congo
Laos
Peru
Guatemala
Cambodia
El Salvador
Nicaragua
Grenada
Libya
Panama
Iraq
Bosnia
Sudan
Afghanistan
Yugoslavia

Why are we not terrorists? Don’t you think that if some of the above operations had been carried against us we would refer to them as terrorism?

DNFTT

Not to justify some of the U.S.'s botched operations, but there’s a military THEORY of “collateral damage.” The short of it is this: if your goal is a defensive military strike (i.e., taking out a munitions plant) and civilians get killed in the process, it’s sad, but “acceptable” (I use the term loosely) because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. If your goal is to freak out the population by SOLELY killing civilians, then you’re a terrorist.

I don’t know the circumstances behind the individual countries and bombings you’ve listed. It might be easier to discuss this issue if you specified what was hit, why, and what botched results came of it.

Moderator’s Note: DrLizardo, please review our FAQ on the subject of accusations of “trolling”. Do not do that again.

sigh… it’s very simple.

We are not terrorists because we don’t TRY to kill civilians.
We don’t see killing civilians as a legimate military target for the sake of killing them.
We don’t try to kill as many people as possible in as spectacular fashion as possible to “prove” a point.

Sometimes we kill civilians, yes, and it’s terrible. But it’s not the goal of our military operations, and equating the two is a fallacy.

It may be a matter of semantics but do you see a diference between attacking military targets with the intent to reduce someones capacity to make war and attacking civilians for the purpose of making a political statement?

Terrorists engage in terrorism. Although I know you will say the reasons were political, I will still point out that the things you mentioned were military actions and we were not too weak to mount open assaults (they were open assaults).