[SJSAMPLE]

I support the war in Iraq as well as anybody, but; when you invade a country (for whatever purpose), the people who live there aren't "terrorists". I wouldn't call them "freedom fighters", either, because they aren't fighting for freedom. But they are definitely "combatants". We have to stop defining-down this term as much as possible. Pretty soon, everybody with a grudge/disagreement against the government will be a "terrorist".

[PiP PiP Cherrio]

So true. However, was the Tank a Marine or an Army DAT?

[Eric Esot]

I support the war in Iraq as well as anybody, but; when you invade a country (for whatever purpose), the people who live there aren't "terrorists". I wouldn't call them "freedom fighters", either, because they aren't fighting for freedom. But they are definitely "combatants". We have to stop defining-down this term as much as possible. Pretty soon, everybody with a grudge/disagreement against the government will be a "terrorist".

First off, “WE” did not invade, or conquer Iraq – A coalition of nations liberated the Iraqi people form an evil and oppressive regime.

To call politically motivated violence carried out by subnational groups; actions that threaten the stability and unity of a free people; perpetrated against noncombatant targets (the attack occurred in front of the city's main mosque and civilians were killed and wounded); anything other then acts of terrorism is ludicrous.

[xm177e2]

I support the war in Iraq as well as anybody, but; when you invade a country (for whatever purpose), the people who live there aren't "terrorists".

The grenade attack wounded and killed Iraqi civilians standing in front of the city's main mosque. If those casualties were deliberate, than it is clear this was a terror attack (because injuring/killing civilians was part of their plan).