Peaceful Palestinians?

Military has the previously mentioned (and additional) stuff.

Civilian-some schmoe walking down the street.

Terrorist - one who murders, especially civilians, usually large groups, to create a state of terror.
 
Gonz said:
Yes it is.
Click to expand...



thats bullshit and you damn well know it. they attacked them.



Mohicans and Iriquois come to mind.




maybe its me but terrorism seems to be hard to define. one side is saying it is another is saying its not. we are using some hostile tactics in this war that can be defined possibly as terrorism
 
Oz said:
neither of which were worth a pot of spit without your own government ;)

Terrorist have agenda's (declaration of independace) a chain of command (heirachy) and a flag (or any symbol they use). So what is the difference :shrug:
Click to expand...


A government was in place. Of course, it wasn't recognized until we won.
 
freako104 said:
thats bullshit and you damn well know it. they attacked them.



Mohicans and Iriquois come to mind.
Click to expand...


Both tribes still exist & have have lands.
 
Gonz said:
Military has the previously mentioned (and additional) stuff.

Civilian-some schmoe walking down the street.

Terrorist - one who murders, especially civilians, usually large groups, to create a state of terror.
Click to expand...


You wage war against the enemy. Not just their army...
 
True, Squiggy, it is against an enemy. However, targeting a civilian area that has no material target with the express interest of creating terror is not the job of the military.
 
freako104 said:
if you read my post I never said we wiped them out. but that we attacked them. there is a difference
Click to expand...


The don't interject irrelevent information during an ongoing debate. I was referring to OZ's remark about annihilating tribes during teh Revolutionary War, not downthe road in 1845 or some shit.
 
no it was relevant. basically his post was a bit extreme. I cleared it out so that it was still true but not exaggerated. also it is in our history.
 
Gonz said:
True, Squiggy, it is against an enemy. However, targeting a civilian area that has no material target with the express interest of creating terror is not the job of the military.
Click to expand...


Wrong. Terrorism is a large part of psychological warfare and we do it too. but you dismiss ours because dubya told you you wouldn't be a good american if you said anything...
 
Squiggy said:
Wrong. Terrorism is a large part of psychological warfare and we do it too. but you dismiss ours because dubya told you you wouldn't be a good american if you said anything...
Click to expand...


There you go again ( ;) ). You said something we could work with & then you had to blow it with a dumb Dubya remark.
 
but doesnt Bush feel that way? I thought he did. you know my way is the right way and your not an American if you dont follow.






but he is right we do it too but so does every country in the world dont they? except maybe Switzerland and the Netherlands and other neutral countries
 
But you DO dismiss everything we do a if we're above reproach. For a while there, I was expecting you to tell me how anti-american i was for recognizing the faults in your arguments. :eek6:
 
Maybe that because I'm sick & tired of nothing but anti-American rhetoric. It's time for people to stand up for their country. I'm standing up for mine. So few others do.
 
it seems more like your standing up for Bush. doesnt standing for your country mean standing for what it believes in? in our case that would be the freedoms wouldnt it
 
Hamas IS a terrorist organization, the US revolutionary movement was not. It's not to say the Americans followed all the rules of war during the American Revolutionary War, but the overall process and goal of the Americans was not to terrorize the British civilian populations in the colonies, but to militarily defeat the British armed forces in the colonies.

The goal of Hamas is not to defeat the Israeli military, but to terrorize the general Israeli population to such an extent that the Israeli political leaders no longer have the backing of the people required to continue the military occupation of Palestinian areas and are forced to retreat.

The objective of the American revolutionary forces and the Palestinian terrorists might be very similar, but the ends to the means are vastly different.

The assignation of the Hamas leader was not an act of terrorism by Israel. Ahmed Yassin was a self declared and recognized leader of Hamas and ordered the deployment of dozens of suicide bombers resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Israelis. Even if you argue that Hamas is not a terrorist organization, but a valid army, the assignation is still fair. Although many countries now condone the use of assignations to hinder an enemy, it is not a terrorist act. It is considered legitimate and has been used many times by sovereign nations in the past as a method of war.

Now some other things that Israel has done I think can border the definition of terrorism. Bulldozing civilian housing in retaliation for suicide bombers seems an awful lot like going purely after civilians rather than attacking terrorists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top