There seems to be some confusion

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
George Washington, et al, was not a terrorist.
The American Revolution was not a succession of terrorist acts.

Terrorism is an act of (extreme) violence whose main purpose is to create angst, anxiety, fear and/or insecurity among the civilian population.

Terrorists can be of any race, ethnicity, religion or nationality. They do not wear badges, flags, uniforms or other symbols to mark themselves as an organized group or military unit or combatant of a state.

It's targets usually include areas of greater civilian populations (busses, buildings, trains) as opposed to miltary structures or personel.



The heinous nature of terrorism is often excused by some who think we need to find out why they hate us. Who cares. Any single person or group (uniquely identified or not) that has the audacity to indiscriminately target civilians needs to be jailed or killed.
 
those of us who want to know why dont excuse it Gonz. Wed like to know why so we can change whatever it is they dont like. and I am sure Britian considered us terrorists during the Revolutionary war. Japan probly did(they still might who knows).
 
You want to know what the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists want? I'll tell you. For you & all of your family, classmates, neighbors....EVERY SINGLE HUMAN ON EARTH to become Muslim. Nothing short will do. We're out of Saudi Arabia. Are they happy? NO!

As far as Britain, in 1776-terrorists weren't invented yet.

Japan owes everything they are to us, including their peace & safety.
 
they may owe us but that doesnt mean they like us.


and isnt acts of violence considered a terroist act? then it exsisted long before modern age.




as far as the Muslim thing goes there has to be more. I say this because they didnt attack us before 9/11, they have pretty much herded like cattle, their Holy Land isnt there for them only for the Jews.
 
Eric, if Al Qaeda, et. al. were to win, you'd be one of the first they would kill off, because of your "freak" nature.

That, and because you stuck your foot in your mouth again by saying the Muslims don't have their holy land, completely forgetting about a little place called Mecca.
 
Gonz said:
George Washington, et al, was not a terrorist.
The American Revolution was not a succession of terrorist acts.
Click to expand...

One man's terrorist is another man's patriot. Your outrage mirrors what many muslims feel about christians (americans) attacking their leaders. Maybe you'd better pay more attention to that fact.

Oh, and by the way, yes, he was a terrorist. The americans brought into play many of the techniques used by today's terrorist during that war.
 
Professur said:
One man's terrorist is another man's patriot. Your outrage mirrors what many muslims feel about christians (americans) attacking their leaders. Maybe you'd better pay more attention to that fact.

Oh, and by the way, yes, he was a terrorist. The americans brought into play many of the techniques used by today's terrorist during that war.
Click to expand...

I asked you somewhere else for examples. Haven' seen 'em yet.
 
Not gonna, either. Unless I can dig up one of my old history books. But it started off with geurilla warfare (fighting from trees, camo, sniping). Which was against the standard doctrine of warfare, which was to stand in ranks wearing brightly coloured uniforms to show you're not a civilian. They were fighting with what they had, against a superior force. Sounds exactly like what today's terrorists are doing.
 
They weren't specifically targeting civilians for death, to my knowledge. Until you can show that they were, I'm gonna ignore your statement.
 
HomeLAN said:
They weren't specifically targeting civilians for death, to my knowledge. Until you can show that they were, I'm gonna ignore your statement.
Click to expand...

No, perhaps they weren't. They were however, ignoring the rules of "civilized" warfare. As I say, it's a point of view thing.
 
Previous targets have included the British military, the Royal Ulster Constabulary, British Government officials, Unionist politicians and civilians in both Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
Click to expand...

Source

Truly sorry about your cousins.
 
freako104 said:
they may owe us but that doesnt mean they like us.


and isnt acts of violence considered a terroist act? then it exsisted long before modern age.




as far as the Muslim thing goes there has to be more. I say this because they didnt attack us before 9/11, they have pretty much herded like cattle, their Holy Land isnt there for them only for the Jews.
Click to expand...


Actually the Japanese love us. Unlike the French.

me said:
Terrorism is an act of (extreme) violence whose main purpose is to create angst, anxiety, fear and/or insecurity among the civilian population.
Click to expand...
 
Professur said:
Oh, and by the way, yes, he was a terrorist. The americans brought into play many of the techniques used by today's terrorist during that war.
Click to expand...

Guerilla warfare in not equal to terrorism.
 
Shit happens in a war zone.



But, HL, I have to question you on one point. Your definition of civilian.

During WWII RAF and USAF bombed the shit outta hundreds of factories, employing civilians. During the afgan conflict, USAF bombed the shit outta villages, housing civilians. The justification for that was that they were supporting the war efforts. Can't the same be said for those in the WTC? After all, isn't the US's greatest weapon it's economy? Can't they be said to have taken the same action as Hitler did, bombing London?

And the IRA never targets civilians. By their definitiion. Any more than the US, Britain, or any other country has.
 
Gonz said:
Guerilla warfare in not equal to terrorism.
Click to expand...

Not any more. But then, it was. Definitions change. Haven't you realized that by now? Espescially when your the one writing the dictionary.
 
Professur said:
Shit happens in a war zone.



But, HL, I have to question you on one point. Your definition of civilian.

During WWII RAF and USAF bombed the shit outta hundreds of factories, employing civilians. During the afgan conflict, USAF bombed the shit outta villages, housing civilians. The justification for that was that they were supporting the war efforts. Can't the same be said for those in the WTC? After all, isn't the US's greatest weapon it's economy? Can't they be said to have taken the same action as Hitler did, bombing London?

And the IRA never targets civilians. By their definitiion. Any more than the US, Britain, or any other country has.
Click to expand...

At least in WW2, we were dealing with declared war conditions. Doesn't make it right, but that is, to my mind, a vital distinction. Bin Laden's marry men crashed jetliners into the workplaces of non-combatants as a sneak attack. Stop trying to compare the two.

Back to your argument that Washington was a terrorist, I will agree that he was a guerilla. But unless you show that civilians were chosen as preferred targets, he fails to meet the definition of terrorist for me. And when you drop flame-bait and refuse to back it up, I'll ignore the fact that you even said it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top