Talk:State-sponsored terrorism
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the State-sponsored terrorism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | Saudi Arabia and state sponsored terrorism was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 May 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into State-sponsored terrorism. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Questionable opinion pieces about the US as a state sponsor of terror
editThis quote is very subjective and opinionated, probably written by people with a bias against the US.
"The U.S. Government, which has repeatedly engaged in sponsorship of terrorism as a feature of its foreign policy,"
If you actually read the sources, they say things like "the US supported the South African apartheid government". While supporting the apartheid government was morally questionable at best, its completely illogical to say that the government itself was a terrorist force. Just because a government is immoral doesn't mean its synonymous with terrorism. Calling it a feature of foreign policy is even more absurd. This is like calling the US a state sponsor of terror because it does trade with China which has subjugated the Tibetans and Uyghur Muslims.
You can certainly criticize US foreign policy mistakes in droves, but it's an entirely different statement to claim that US used terrorism as a feature. The author, Edward S. Herman, is incredibly biased and has an axe to grind. The source is trash basically. Supporting a government you don't like isn't terrorism. A country that supports Iran for example wouldn't itself be a state sponsor of terror even though Iran is. It's not like a communicable disease.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/29766326 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.59.115 (talk) 06:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Citation issue in "India" section
editSection claims Sri Lanka has accused India of sponsoring terrorism but the linked citation shows exactly the opposite; an errant minister redacting his statement [Citation 13]
China is supporting northeast india terrorist group
editRight Wing Indian politicians and their role with state sponser terror
editMany Indian riots was program by State to target and kill people from a community. We may include that also in India section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.48.108.42 (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)