system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: We should stop using the word 'terrorist' or 'terrorism'

You hear of this word a lot all over the news and by our political representatives especially since 9/11.  A ‘terrorist’ is a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims. But have you ever really questioned what it takes to be considered a terrorist? Like what do you have to do exactly to be labeled as one? Do you need to blow up buildings, kill innocent people, think a certain way, and be apart of a radical or religious group? Are you really immune as a U.S. citizen? How many innocent people are falsely labeled or punished? And who gets to decide? 

The problem with the war on terror is there will never be an end. It is the perfect war. Perfect for growing the military industrial complex adding to the increase of mass surveillance, police militarization, drone strikes, and innocents being accused, imprisoned or killed. It is a true modern day witch-hunt. There will always be a ‘terrorist’ because terrorism is an ideology. But as the years go by the word is being more and more loosely defined. 

By using the word terrorism to fight our enemies, it has completely sheepified the population. It simply is a lot easier to get your way as a politician if you use it. In reality there is no black and white. The truth is people have different interests; to them they are freedom fighters, and heroes fighting for their values. We are probably even considered a terrorist to our terrorists. It is clear the war on terror has failed and has led nowhere besides a never-ending cycle of fighting fire with fire or violence for violence. Lets take a new perspective. Lets start educating each other about our different viewpoints and cultures. Lets once and for all end the use of the words ‘terrorism, and terrorist’. Instead lets work towards a greater understanding of the world and each other. The end of the never-ending war starts with investment in education not the latest high tech weaponry.
gpt
You kind of dilute your argument at the end when you get into the "success" of the "war on terror", so let me focus on your title and the beginning of your post.

Here's the Merriam Webster definition of terrorism:
": the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal"

To me, that's pretty clear.  9/11 was terrorism.  They didn't attack strategic targets, they tried to terrorize the US into meeting their demands.  The same is true of, say, the IRA bombings in London, the Boston Marathon bombing, and pretty much any suicide bomber who goes into civilian areas with the intent of killing as many people as possible.

> But have you ever really questioned what it takes to be considered a terrorist? Like what do you have to do exactly to be labeled as one? Do you need to blow up buildings, kill innocent people, think a certain way, and be apart of a radical or religious group?

Well, yeah, you need to target non-strategic targets in a way to incite mayhem and fear to accomplish a political goal.  So, if you are just insane and think it's fun to kill people, you aren't a terrorist, just a murderer without a political agenda.  If you try to blow up a military base, you aren't a terrorist, you're a guerrilla fighter..  

>Are you really immune as a U.S. citizen? 

No.  The Oklahoma City bombers were terrorists.  So was the Unabomber.

>How many innocent people are falsely labeled or punished? And who gets to decide?

The pursuit of potential terrorists is a different question.  But most people decide that those who attempt to use violent acts to cause fear to achieve political goals are, by definition, terrorists.

>The problem with the war on terror is there will never be an end. 

It's shorthand for "preventing terrorist acts", and easier than saying, "The war on Al Queda, Al Shabab, the KKK, Hamas, and every other group that wants to commit terrorist acts.

>It is the perfect war. Perfect for growing the military industrial complex adding to the increase of mass surveillance, police militarization, drone strikes, and innocents being accused, imprisoned or killed. 

Yes, in the same way that "the war on crime" or "the war on poverty" will never be "won".  But just because you can't declare victory doesn't mean you shouldn't fight it.

>It is a true modern day witch-hunt. There will always be a ‘terrorist’ because terrorism is an ideology.

No, a "witch hunt" implies that you're searching for imaginary enemies.  That's simply not true.  There are real live people out there who want to blow up Americans, the more the better.  There are Americans leaving to fight in the middle east who may come back and use what they've learned.  This isn't just some bogus red scare stuff, there are people who want you dead, simply for being an American.

And Terrorism isn't an ideology, it's a tool.  But it's a tool that people are willing to use.

>But as the years go by the word is being more and more loosely defined.

Do you have any examples of this?

>Lets start educating each other about our different viewpoints and cultures.

I don't think that Osama bin Laden planned 9/11 because he felt he wasn't understood.  

I agree in theory that we need to consider the consequences of our actions, and not make enemies needlessly, but we live in a dangerous world.  Dropping all our weapons and welcoming them with open arms would not end well.