That’s exactly what the DS9 team says happened.

That’s literally just a clip from the episode lmao. That’s not “the DS9 team” saying it wasn’t terrorism.

Terrorism is the use of violence against the general public to change behaviours or policies.

Here’s the definition google gives me:

Terrorism is the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, to instill fear and coerce governments or societies to achieve political, religious, or ideological goals. While no single, universally accepted definition exists, it commonly involves premeditated violence, targets non-combatants, and seeks to influence a broader audience beyond the immediate victims

Every single element of that definition is met by Garak’s actions. You’re trying to shift definitions (both from the generally accepted meaning, and from your earlier claims where you said that it wasn’t terrorism because people “didn’t seem terrified”) and arbitrarily claiming targeting politicians somehow makes it not count. There is absolutely no requirement that the victims of an act of terrorism must not be political figures.

Nobody is going to be afraid that the next attack is going to hurt them because they’re not likely to be flying out of Romulan space on a diplomatic mission

Again, complete nonsense. It’s not about whether people are “afraid the next attack is going to hurt them.” That has absolutely nothing to do with it. In your mind, do you think rural farmers in Montana watched an attack on the financial center of New York and thought, “Oh my god, they could’ve just as easily decided to go after my farm!”

And again - the Romulans literally do think that the next attack is going to hurt them! That’s why they go to war with the Dominion! Because the point of Garak’s actions is to convince them that the Dominion is a threat to Romulus itself! Not just shuttles transporting politicians!

You are wrong on so many levels that even if your completely incorrect premises were true, you’d still be wrong!

In addition, if Garrack is a terrorist, what are his demands as a terrorist? When does he make it clear that he’s behind the attack, and that similar attacks will happen unless his aims are achieved?

None of those are requirements for terrorism, even by your own definition.

What Garrack did isn’t terrorism. It was a false flag assassination.

What Bin Laden did wasn’t terrorism, it was hijacking. Or is it possible that a thing can be both terrorism and another thing at the same time?

His goal wasn’t even to cause fear in anyone. It was to get the Romulans to believe the evidence he planted that the Dominion were planning to invade Romulus.

And he wanted them to believe that evidence in order to cause fear that the Dominion would attack them.

There’s nothing about what happened that even comes close to terrorism.

You have to be trolling, there is no possible way for you to be this dumb. Even if you wanted to argue that it “technically” isn’t terrorism by some bullshit made-up pedantry, it’s obviously at least “close” to terrorism.

You are

Wow, we’ve reached “I know you are but what am I.” While once again completely ignoring a valid point on no basis. You literally said, “So, he created terror among the Romulans? They sure didn’t seem terrified to me,” and now you’re doubling down on calling arguing against that a “strawman.”

No, he was a senator, his crew were the private crew of a senator.

And? That in no way makes them not count as “the public.”

Absolutely insane that your argument here is “it doesn’t count as terrorism because he targeted a political figure.” Targeting a political figure makes it more obviously terrorism!

So, he created terror among the Romulans? They sure didn’t seem terrified to me.

Your whole argument was “it’s not terrorism because they weren’t terrified.”

Whack that straw man, go for it. You’ll defeat it soon!

Absolute clown.

Exactly, so no members of the public were harmed

Both he and his crew were members of the public.

Garak wasn’t trying to evoke fear of terrorism in the public

Ah, so now it has to be specifically “fear of terrorism in the public” to qualify. This is ridiculous, I’m not going to engage with these shifted goalposts.

That’s not terrorism. That’s just fear of a war or betrayal.

Your whole argument was “it’s not terrorism because they weren’t terrified.” Now you’re admitting that it did, in fact, cause them to be afraid.

Was the Romulan senator on a space liner with lots of other passengers, or was he in his own private shuttle?

He was in his private shuttle, with his crew and escort.

Again, terrorism is about a fear that someone who is merely a member of the general public might get killed or injured.

Which was the explicit goal of Garak’s actions. To make the general public afraid the Dominion was going to kill them.

Blowing up someone’s private yacht is not terrorism because no ordinary member of the public thinks “that could have been my yacht!”

Got it, so 9/11 wasn’t terrorism because I don’t work in a skyscraper.

This is complete nonsense. If they can target a high profile figure, they can target anyone. Furthermore, a major defining factor of terrorism is trying to advance a political agenda, and targeting a senator to draw the Romulans into a war could not possibly be more in line with that.

A mob hit on another mobster is terrorism?

Is that seeking to evoke fear in the public to advance a political agenda, like Garak was?

The shootout at the OK Corral was terrorism?

Is that seeking to evoke fear in the public to advance a political agenda, like Garak was?

A 18th century duel is terrorism?

Is that seeking to evoke fear in the public to advance a political agenda, like Garak was?

A bullfighter getting killed by a bull is terrorism?

Is that seeking to evoke fear in the public to advance a political agenda, like Garak was?

two non stereotypical men existing is gay coded unilaterally by one of the actors

No? My point is that they were not just “two non stereotypical men existing” and that at least one of those men was explicitly trying to broadcast gay vibes.

If anything thats a huge letdown because in the end, Robinson could not conceive these two men being just unusual and unlikely friends. MUST be fucking.

Also no. Just because Garak is attracted to Bashir does not mean that they are necessarily “fucking.” Queer people can have friends of the same gender, and Garak’s sexuality and relationship with Bashir is intentionally ambiguous.

Frankly, I don’t see a reason why Garak’s sexuality would be a “huge letdown” for you other than homophobia. Regardless of a sexual element, their dynamic is the same.

There’s also plenty of other platonic friendships in the show, like between Bashir and Miles.

So, the public is unlikely to think that they’re in danger.

Literally the whole point was to make the Romulans think that they’re in danger from the Dominion. You know, point 2 that I made earlier that you completely and arbitrarily ignored?

Look at where it happened. Was it in a public area on Romulus or something? No, it was far outside Romulan territory.

This is completely irrelevant. Imagine someone planted a bomb on a plane and it detonated while it was in the middle of the ocean. Would the distance make people not feel in danger and therefore make the act “obviously not terrorism” somehow??? What a completely absurd position.

Was it a member of the general public?

The target was a civilian (plus the crew, of course), and the general public does not have to be targeted for it to be terrorism.

Lmao blowing up a diplomat “obviously” wasn’t terrorism. Sure, buddy. I can’t tell who’s being more ridiculous between you and the person claiming he wasn’t gay-coded.

You know you can still like the character even though he’s very obviously and objectively a terrorist? I do.

My definition of terrorism would very clearly and unequivocally say that planting a bomb on a diplomat’s ship is an act of terrorism. That’s a very standard definition and straightforward case. The meaning has not “changed,” such an act would always have been considered terrorism.

This whole question of whether it’s still considered terrorism when a state does it or whether we should call that something else, is just because you disputed that definition, saying that terrorism is when you harm the populace. I just pointed out that Garak also harmed the populace, and that Kira, who you do consider a terrorist, did not. Include acts conducted by states, don’t include them, either way, Garak did both.

If you completely ignore both of the valid points I just made, yes. Otherwise no.

1. People don’t have to be terrified for it to be terrorism

2. I don’t think we see how they reacted, except that they suddenly decided to enter the war and treat the Dominion as an existential threat, as Garak intended.

But I’m not sure why it’s so important for them to be terrorists.

I’m not sure why it’s so important for them not to be terrorists.

But people usually call it genocide instead of terrorism because the balance of power is top down instead of bottom up.

I don’t really want to get into that tangent, but genocide is not exclusively a “top-down” thing. There were independent militias in WWII that hunted down and exterminated Jews in Eastern European villages (some affiliated with Stefan Bandera), they were committing genocide regardless of state backing.

Regardless, Garak was involved in both (at different times in his life) blowing people up as a non-state actor to advance a political agenda, and in harming a wider populace.

Did Kira try to harm the populace? I feel like most of what she did was more like… blowing up government officials.

It’s pretty hard to come up with a consistent definition of terrorist that wouldn’t include Garak, I’m just saying.

To create terror. It was a false flag operation meant to get the Romulans to see the Dominion as a threat to their safety. The fact that the senator happened to be one of the biggest opponents to fighting the Dominion was icing on the cake, removing him was a bonus but not the main reason for doing it.

You mean like when he participated in the Cardassian occupation?

In that very first scene when he meets Dr. Bashir it’s clear as a bell— and this was my choice—that he was sexually attracted to this good-looking young Starfleet doctor. And although they didn’t follow that up with an explicitly gay character, that ambiguity about Garak remained.

[Laughs] Oh yeah. I broadcast it as strongly as I could. But you know, they never really followed up on it, we never even had a discussion about it. Deep Space Nine was already at right angles to the Star Trek franchise. It was a different kind of Star Trek show. And I think that suddenly to bring on an openly gay alien, who, who was having this relationship with Dr. Bashir. I think that was maybe a bridge too far. I’m guessing at this, but I, but I think that may be it.

I think Ira and the writers loved that it just added to the mystery of the guy. What is he? Who is he? Is he this or is he that? I think it just reinforced what they were already trying to do with the character.

Yeah totally, 100% just shippers reading into it, uh huh.

Was he a terrorist? Spy, sure. Torturer, sure. Assassin, yeah. But terrorist?

Non-terroristically planting a bomb on an innocent diplomat’s ship.

This is such an individualist framing.

US Stages Fake Coup to Wipe Out National Debt - The Onion

Yeah it turns out cozying up to evil powerful people can advance your personal position more than fighting against them, who knew?

Say what you will about Luke and accidental incest, but he’s not in the files, I’ll tell you that.

I wonder if any of you who stayed home and avoided being a part of the solution regret yours.

I really don’t know how to get this through your heads. Trump could march me personally into a gas chamber and I still wouldn’t regret my third party vote. If the reason I die is because I was too unwilling to support genocide, then I will die proudly. I did not adopt my position on this idly, on some lark, with no thought of what it could mean.

If we collectively accepted that genocide was not an acceptable option, there would be no problem, because there’d be now way to avoid the pressure of such a movement. But instead, we have people like you trying to assert that genocide is somehow acceptable and demanding absolute, unconditional support for the democrats, and predictably failing.

What kind of world would we be living in if everyone in history allowed themselves to be limited by what the system (what the people in power) said was possible? We’d be living under a monarchy with chattel slavery.