Abstract
Is it conceivable that indiscriminate terrorism can ever be justified or excused?1 To deliberately target the “innocent” with any sort of political violence, regardless of how one conceives of “innocence” or liability to attack, is a clear prima facie wrong. Whatever harms inflicted upon those who have done nothing to forfeit their rights to life, bodily integrity, liberty, or property are taken ex hypothesi to be unjustified. While not all indiscriminate political violence is terrorism, it is the targeting of the “innocent” that primarily makes acts of indiscriminate terrorism morally problematic. In addition, it is often noted that indiscriminate targeting, whether by terrorist groups or more traditional military units, tends to provoke a like response from one's opposition such that there is an escalation toward total warfare (i.e., warfare where no limits are set regarding the means of fighting).