Recent terrorist attacks in Iraq

Recently, the New York Times reported that insurgents in Iraq detonated at least two bombs containing deadly chlorine gas. Dozens of civilians were injured in the attacks, but most attacks in Iraq of this nature are directed toward U.S. or Iraqi military. I find this interesting because I think that many Americans may assume that attacks directed towards military personel should be considered terrorist acts. Richardson, the author of What Terrorists Want claims that if violent action is taken against a soldier it should be considered guerilla warfare, not terrorism. I am inclined to agree with her. I think that it is important to distinguish between warfare and terrorism because terrorists generally have a different type of culture than those who would only target other military. Perhaps if some insurgents were not considered enemy combatants, but rather enemy military, then peaceful negotiations could ensue. If some groups of insurgents would be given that status and respect, they would definitely be more inclined to negotiate. If some combatants are not technically terrorists, then it would be acceptable to negotiate with them.

One Response to “Recent terrorist attacks in Iraq”

  1. It May Not Be Terrorism, But . . « IRregular Blogging Says:

    […] It May Not Be Terrorism, But . . Even if we conclude that attacks against U.S. troops could not be considered terrorism (and that would depend on the context), we might still see problems with the use of chlorine gas weapons.  I think it is problematic whether these could meet ius in bello criteria of discrimination or proportionality. What do others think? Recent terrorist attacks in Iraq […]

Leave a comment