They crossed a line when they did this to a military base…
They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:
criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages…
The UK parliament is sovereign, not the UN. So how the UN defines things isn’t relevant.
Also the law is meant to prevent terrorism. While I don’t agree with the designation in this case, I can understand the concern around how this group is escalating their attacks. There’s this “globalize the intifada” stochastic terrorism going around and the Iranian regime (the ultimate source of most of this shit) just got it’s ass handed to them and may be looking to do something to show their people they’re still “strong”.
Since the UK signed the UN charter in 1945, it might behoove us to conform to their definitions unless, of course the UK parliament has agreed on a different definition for terrorism?
They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:
-definition of terrorism, UN resolution 1566
The UK parliament is sovereign, not the UN. So how the UN defines things isn’t relevant.
Also the law is meant to prevent terrorism. While I don’t agree with the designation in this case, I can understand the concern around how this group is escalating their attacks. There’s this “globalize the intifada” stochastic terrorism going around and the Iranian regime (the ultimate source of most of this shit) just got it’s ass handed to them and may be looking to do something to show their people they’re still “strong”.
Since the UK signed the UN charter in 1945, it might behoove us to conform to their definitions unless, of course the UK parliament has agreed on a different definition for terrorism?