22.08.2013 Views

Legitimate use of military force against state-sponsored - Air University

Legitimate use of military force against state-sponsored - Air University

Legitimate use of military force against state-sponsored - Air University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Another issue is the choice and <strong>use</strong> <strong>of</strong> weapons, not by the terrorists but by <strong>state</strong>s<br />

opposing terrorists. For example, in time <strong>of</strong> armed conflict dumdum bullets are prohibited. In<br />

time <strong>of</strong> peace, they are not. Most nations <strong>use</strong> dumdum-like ammunition in terrorist situations, not<br />

to inflict unnecessary suffering on the terrorist but to contain the hostile situation. Dumdum<br />

rounds have a greater tendency not to pass through the body <strong>of</strong> the person shot, thus reducing<br />

likelihood <strong>of</strong> incidental injury to others. In aircraft hijacking situations, the rounds are less likely<br />

to pierce the hull <strong>of</strong> the aircraft, thereby causing depressurization. 95<br />

Summary and Transition<br />

This chapter has outlined two different approaches to <strong>state</strong>-<strong>sponsored</strong> international<br />

terrorism. The West, including the United States, has elected to respond to terrorism through the<br />

law en<strong>force</strong>ment approach rather than to invoke the law <strong>of</strong> armed conflict. Both approaches have<br />

advantages and disadvantages. The choice is not clear cut. Table 2 compares the two approaches.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!