September 11th's Assault On US Diplomatic Mission In Benghazi Classified As "Act of War"

In this Sept. 13, 2012 file photo, a Libyan man investigates the inside of the U.S. Consulate, after an attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador …more  Chris Stevens on the night of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya.

At present, until a legally binding definition is agreed upon by all responsible parties - the most common definition of terror includes creating fear through the use of violence against civilians, forcing them to act in an involuntary manner.  The distinction between an act of terror and an act of war is predicated upon those individuals who were the target of the violence. 

If those who were targeted were civilian – the act was, by definition, an act of terror.  And if the targets of violence were government or military related - the act was one of war.

This distinction is important in clearing the way for President Obama to take military action against Libya some time before Election Day.  In fact, at present, no investigation indicates that Al Qaeda was involved in the September 11th violence, which left four Americans dead in Benghazi.  With Al Qaeda ruled out – that makes it even more justifiable for the President to retaliate against Libya.

The President may feel it necessary to take military action before Monday's Presidential debate with Governor Romney.  If the debate goes poorly for the President, a strike against Libya could appear to be ill motivated.  It could be perceived that the action was his best attempt to secure a second term.

The question hanging in the air until Monday's debate - 
     "Will the President take military action against Libya?" 

And if so:
     "Did the President take military action against Libya before Monday's debate to generate the appearance of having a strong foreign policy?"