It's direct action. Violence is direct action against people's bodies, not property directly involved in genocide.

How are British refuelling and transport aircraft directly involved in genocide?

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/palestine-group-attacks-raf-...

Its definitely not OK to vandalise things, and if is not terrorism what is it? War? In which case expect the military to shoot back.

What about their attack that disabled a police officer mentioned in this thread. That is an attack on her body.

I don't think a country is well-served by an overly broad definition of terrorism.

You might disagree: the fact that you mention the military "shooting back" when we're discussing a jet-engine being sabbotaged suggests that you believe a state is allowed to be / ought to be disproportionate in its violence towards its citizens.

> the fact that you mention the military "shooting back" when we're discussing a jet-engine being sabbotaged suggests that you believe a state is allowed to be / ought to be disproportionate in its violence towards its citizens.

That is in no way a good faith interpretation of what I said.

If you don’t like your government’s policy vote for someone else. If you try to change it by force I will cheer on your suppression and incapacitation by force.