I applaud Mary Ann Zimmerman for initiating public discussion on the issue of terrorism ("Elusive definition of terrorism used for agendas," Nov. 4). However, I think she is missing the point about why there is a difference between terrorists and states killing civilians. A difference exists because there is no easy way to strike back at terrorists the way we can if there is a state involved. Almost all terrorist groups are supported by states like Iran, Syria, Afghanistan during the Taliban and Iraq before Saddam.

The reason President Bush initiated his "with us or against us" policy is precisely because of this. Hezbollah, Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad would not be able to operate as they do now without help from Syria and Iran. There is no question that these states know that terrorists live in their country and operate from them. They send them money and weapons without even trying to hide them anymore.

The goal of terrorism is to kill as many civilians as possible, while the goal of a just and moral defense force, such as Israel or the United States, is to capture lethal terrorists, while minimizing innocent death. Global terrorists have the goal of killing as many innocent lives as possible for political reasons, while a moral defense is to arrest, and when arresting is impossible, kill only people that aid terrorists and coordinate deaths of people in restaurants or buses.