Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if the definition of terrorism I use is one of the 11 definitions that preclude that possibility.
Yes, some definitions are crappy. Do we have a word for "imperialist government uses violence against people to achieve political goals"? Because "it's not terrorism because it's a state" is always gonna stink of trying to dodge the topic on a technicality.
Yes, we call this "war".
> Because "it's not terrorism because it's a state" is always gonna stink of trying to dodge the topic on a technicality.
No, it's not. Nobody is trying to dogde the bad aspects of the word, it's just that terrorism specifically is, by definition, not from a state.