I said:
Terrorism usually is "about" changing political leaders' minds.
Dan said:
No it isn’t. It’s a bunch of pissed little boys who have an axe to grind against authority, but rather than stating their issues, they would rather kill the authority’s family and friends, wanting to do nothing but frighten people into obedience. It’s fucking stupid, and they just need to be shot.
I said:
This isn't about changing our mind, it's more about recuiting members for the cult and simply attacking the "enemy".
Dan said:
Yes. That’s terrorism, my friend.

My comment:
I was attempting to show a difference between this suicide attack and "normal terrorism"- such as in UK and Israel. Obviously, I didn't succeed.
Terrorism is defined in a dictionary as: "The unlawful use or threaten use of force or violence to intimidate or coerce societies or governments, often for idealogical or political reasons."
The point is [I think] this attack wasn't intended to "intimidate or coerce".
Terrorism is mainly a political act- this is why terrorist acts also usually include a message, "We did it because of [fill in blank]". Terrorists would normally "justify" their acts because of "some need". In other words a "normal terrorists" wouldn't blow up a dam and make it look like it was some "accident". They don't simply want to kill people, they want to kill people to "send a message".