This was actually an accidental postscript. I'd included it in my original e-mail, then decided I hadn't really thought through whether terrorism can *never* be condoned ... but neglected to delete this phrase. I'm glad I didn't. Terrorism is a classic worse-than-a-crime-it's-blunder tactic. Just think of Pan American Flight 800, the bombing of the World Trade Center, etc. -- all these actions that have de-legitimized (in the opinion of many) very legitimate grievances.
> I gave a whole set of justifications for terrorism, which the
> Left has used
> in defending the PLO, the IRA and a whole host of other
> anti-colonialist
> groups over the years.
No, you won't hear any such special pleading for terrorist groups from me. Their actions are cruel and counterproductive -- in a word, insane.
> Carl worries I am justifying mass murder. Since I
> specifically noted that
> the main justification for terror was to prevent the GREATER number of
> deaths that military action would entail, that seems a direct
> refusal to
> engage the argument.
I think there is no such simple tradeoff. I think terrorism has a corrupting and brutalizing effect that turns societies into garrison states and sets the stage for the eventual mass slaughter of true war.
Carl Remick