Is collateral damage can be consider terrorism? How do drone attacks are changing warfare?

 

* I believe that United States will not intentionally commit terrorist act, this need to be depicted in the answer*

Below is the student that is addressing in the question above

When defining terrorism or terrorist acts, the common theme that arises is whether or not the acts are justifiable.  The struggle between determining right and wrong or the difference between, what is perceived as good and evil, becomes extremely blurry.  Many acts carried out by the United States can be considered acts of terrorism.  However, in order to do so, thed efinitions of good and evil must be established in order to determine the justifiable nature of the acts.  This is where determining whether the United States acts are of terrorist nature becomes extremely relative.  Groups, such as ISIS, would consider the drone attacks carried out by the United States as senseless acts of terror in order to intimidate or coerce the people in thag region.  They would argue that the innocent lives caught in the crossfire would be victims of terror.  On the other side, the argument would be that we could not know if those individuals were sympathizers and fall in the category of collateral damage.  Drone strikes would be a necessity to preserve American lives and increase our nation's security against the advancement of terrorist groups that mean to do harm to the United States.  In my opinion, it is impossible to answer the question of whether or not American acts can be seen as terrorism given the relative nature of establishing justifiable explanations.