While reading the last posts here I remembered of an article I read in which terrorism and our use of the term is discussed in a philosophical-scientific way. It's quite interesting and as it's result the biggest act of terrorism in History wasn't 9/11 but the bomb droppings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sadly the article is in German but if someone is still interested to read it:

Unser Terrorismus-Tabu

History is written by the winners. Regardless of one's view on history, it's usually how things go.

Isn't war one big act of terrorism in itself?

You can't nuke nuclear plants. To have them fail to the point of leaking deadly radiation the interested party must have an extensive knowledge of how they work and how to do it. Besides, these plants are always guarded even in peaceful times quite seriously.
P.S. Chernobyl is a price of human arrogance, not silly politics.

Not neccessarily. Terrorism is about creating a state of constant fear and that's why the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima as well as many happenings in the cold war later fit the bill extremely well, just like the carpet bombing of civilian areas of Dresden at the end of WW2 btw.
War is most certainly an act of aggression as soon as it leaves the defense inside of your own borders but it's mostly about getting wealth by force and not primarily about creating fear also quite often secondarily as in "Remember what we were capable of? So do as we say or you may see it again up close and personal.".
Most of the civil war going on in Africa seems to be about terrorism / control by fear though and many stuff the mass media do in order to create fear to keep the civilians easy to control (not only in America although they seem to have mastered this).

I agree with you in theory, but it does not matter if a few stick to the dictionary when everyone talks differently.

Not really, the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima was done to force japan to surrender, is that terrorism? to force somebody (albeit in an extreme way) to stop a war. These bombing seems to have no motive other then causing mass destruction and fear.

It was a demonstration of nuclear power creating a pretty long-term fear, wasn't it?
Actually the fear effect was so extreme that lots of Japanese people emigrated to Brazil and from there to other areas like Germany, where I met my ex-gf who's family had this backstory like so many others since they came from the area of Nagasaki.
I think that's exactly what it was supposed to be and it was the point of reference for the cold war, the nuclear threat how it looked in real life.
They could have used other weapons with less catastrophic effects on the environment and an insane number of civilians but it wouldn't have had the same effect.
So yeah, it was probably the biggest act of terrorism in the last centuries and the USA have used this damocles sword of a-bombs hanging over any nation that doesn't do as they're told ever since.

I agree with the latter part. Still, apart from forcing Japan to surrender it also played the role of a stopper for Soviet Union, which in its victory wake would've been able to widen the influence across Europe, but at that point didn't wield equal destructive power in its posession.

Long term effect? We didn't know much about the bomb back then other then it made a big bomb, and does japan hate us now?

Fear of a-bombs (which were only owned by the USA back then and they still have most of those).

Dosen't everybody fear the a-bombs today, and we only know the effects of the bombs thanks to the bombings

Everyone is scared shitless of them now. Especially when every freak tries to make them at some point (like the "beloved" North Korea). I am a proud member of nation that was, and I predict will remain, the only one that gave off its nuclear arsenal. Substitute _proud_ for anything you like.

I didn't even know about the tourism advert from january:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrb02a1FzX4

Nothing is as cynical as reality.