Operation Northwoods Proves That The US May Be Capable Of Endorsing Or Committing Terrorism

My opponent presents to you with the notion that terrorism is not terrorism if it is legal. He would, presumably, describe Operation Northwoods as follows: "The calculated use of lawful violence or the threat of lawful violence to inculcate fear and coerce or intimidate governments or societies in pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious or ideological."My opponent suggests that terrorism doesn't exist less the adjective of "unlawful." I don't think I need to spend much time on this. The description for what is terrorism and what is not terrorism is not contingent on what is lawful. This gross misinterpretation of the definition of terrorism is continued on as my opponent's argument falls apart. I'll illustrate that in my final response."Not irrelevant. The Posse Camitatus Act declares that only by an overt (aka public) act by Congress can the US President legally deploy US forces against US citizens on US soil."Yes, irrelevant. I already covered this. The Posse Camitatus Act refers only to specific US forces, and absolutely does not apply to the Central Intelligence Agency to whom Operation Northwoods belonged. Furthermore, you're still stuck on this notion that terrorism cannot be terrorism if it is lawful. This sub-debate about is Posse Camitatus is not only irrelevant, but entirely wrong because it has nothing to do with the CIA proposals we are discussing. Refer to Round 2 or The Posse Camitatus Act itself. (https://en.wikipedia.org...)"As far we can tell, Operation Northwoods presented 9 different proposals that the Pentagon could consider for gaining political support for military action in Cuba, none of which involved killing US citizens on US soil - which is the whole point of PRO's argument." "Cubans. Not Americans. Sinking a boat is also not unlawful killing if not lives are targeted or lost.""Important note here; the US government has never proposed an unlawful military attack on US citizens on US soil. Operations Northwoods proposals, despite being ethical questionable to some, were also swiftly rejected by the Kennedy administration and never left the drawing board."International Terrorism: Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum. (https://www.fbi.gov...)Operation Northwoods was terrorism. You, yourself, outlined the reasons why. Most of the proposals were not using US forces and did not actually directly harm anyone. Most of the acts were against entirely imaginary victims by entirely imaginary enemies. You just refused to make the next logical leap: asking who the target was.Fortunately Operation Northwoods, itself, explicitly states that the effect of these violent or threatening acts were aimed at US citizens, UN citizens, and their respective governments. 1. It is recognized that any action which becomes pretext for US military intervention in Cuba will lead to a political decision which then would lead to military action.3. Cognizance has been taken of a suggested course of action proposed by the US Navy relating to generated instances in the Guantanmo area.5. The suggested course of action appended to Enclosure A are based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of heightened US-Cuban tensions which place the United States in the position of suffering justifiable grievances. World opinion, and the United Nations forum should be favorably affected by developping the international image of the Cuban government as rash and irresponsible and as an alarming and unprediotable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere.Let's refer to our criteria for terrorism, again: The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear and coerce or intimidate governments or societies in pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious or ideological. (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu...) Does operation Northwoods fit the definition of terrorism? Does it fit your definition of terrorism? My opponent's definition of terrorism is fueled by denial, not reality.(https://www.fbi.gov...)(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)(https://en.wikipedia.org...)The objectives of Operation Northwoods are unquestionably the same as the objectives of terrorism. The means of Operation Northwoods are unequestionably the same as the means of terrorism. Operation Northwoods is a proposal to commit, "encourage," or "generate" acts of violence or fabricate threat of violence on US, Cuban, or international terrority with a stated objective to inculcate fear and coerce or intimidate governments or societies to the purpose of justifying US military action."If the proposals were lawful, then they cannot be considered terrorism."I'll leave the reader with this, because this is exactly where 5 more rounds of debate would lead us. Despite any distractionary arguments my opponent may bring up following this final round, this is where we will land. The reader will be forced to develop an opinion on whether or not these acts of terrorism were lawful. They will be forced to develop and opinion on whether or not terrorism is still terrorism, when it is deemed lawful.And finally, the reader will be forced to develop an opinion on whether or not our currently government is capable of committing or endorsing terrorism. Legal or not, how would you react to finding out that events such as those proposed in "Operation Northwoods" were taking place today, flooding headlines of the news you rely on before determining who you will vote for in the upcoming election? Filling your children with fear and hate.. Filling your fellow citizens with an urgency to join a war effort.Terrorist acts, such as proposed in Operation Northwoods, have a profound impact on government and society. The proposals of Operation Northwoods were aimed at the hearts and minds of US and UN citizens, their politicians, and the brave soldiers who would go on to fight such a war. And let's not forget that it also effects those whom such a war would be waged against.Tl;dr,It is my opinion the Operation Northwoods proves that the US may be capable of endorsing or committing terrorism.