Terrorists or just a terrorist tag?

Submitted by M. H. Jazayeri (United States), Jul 22, 2003 at 19:20

Dear Mr. Pipes,
It is important that you note that the Mojahedin do not attack civilian targets. Some argue that attacking military targets is not a terrorist action, but then by that definition, the Iranian sponsored 1983 attack on an American Barracks in Beirut, which killed 241 American servicemen, would not be considered a terrorist act. I think that the best way to define terrorism is; a consistent policy of attacking civilians for a political motive. That is something which the People's Mojahedin is not guilty of. I think that we should engage supporters of moderate Islam, as you say. Otherwise America would isolate itself to a point of no-return. Though I would also argue, that dealing with ‘Moderate' factions of the present Iranian regime does not serve the interest of the Iranian people, as they continue to operate under a policy of ‘Vali-e-Faghih', which is obedience to the supreme leader. It also fails to serve the interest of the Americans because of Iran's continuous efforts to acquire Weapons of Mass Destruction, most notably, Nuclear Weapons. I agree with you completely that the best policy for the current Administration is one of Regime Change in Iran, and I feel that the best way America can achieve this is from engaging the Mojahedin who are fighting for peace and freedom for the region and who understand the benefits of America and the Islamic world as allies.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".