Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ernie!tedrick
From: tedrick@ernie.BERKELEY.EDU (Tom Tedrick)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion.jewish,net.nlang.africa
Subject: Re: The definition of terrorism is NOT flexible!
Message-ID: <11206@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Wed, 11-Dec-85 05:02:56 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.11206
Posted: Wed Dec 11 05:02:56 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Dec-85 06:32:11 EST
References: <4188@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> <360@ubvax.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: tedrick@ernie.UUCP (Tom Tedrick)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 18
Xref: lsuc net.politics:2406 net.religion.jewish:1699 net.nlang.africa:182

> [... discussion of how to define terrorism ... ]
>WAR IS NOT TERRORISM ...

Well, let me propose the following. The so-called terrorism
we see so much of these days is part of a global war between
the Soviet Union and the west. Since atomic weapons make
total war very risky, the superpowers have resorted to this
new type of war.

In more detail, by applying the divide and conquer principle
(stirring up trouble between various countries and groups)
the Soviets are able to divert attention from the problem
of containing Soviet expansionism.

For example, the so-called arab terrorists are really pawns
(perhaps unwittingly) of Soviet interests, stirring up
trouble between Arabs and Israelis so the Soviets can
gradually annex territory in the middle east.