Defining terrorism - a poll

by Stan Conroy 34 Replies latest social current

• 

  blacksheep

  “Its not the act that is propagander, it is the way it is treated afterwards. Murdering innocent people is wrong. How come the french resistance in ww2 is thought of in a very good light, but the IRA in Eireland are dangerous terrorists.”

  I cannot pretend to fully grasp your attempts at paralleling WWII German occupation of France with ongoing terrorist activities in Northern Ireland. I’m wondering, are you sympathetic to Hitler’s regime, and so find the French's subversive attempts to resist the occupation offensive? I’m really curious. Because what I’m seeing is you are comparing the US occupation in Iraq and trying to rebuild the nation as similar to Nazi Germany’s occupation of, and attempts to sublimate European nations.

  “ Please do not take this as showing any support for them or their action which I think are totally wrong. But both are underground groups who's stated aim is to free their country from an occupying force, the french from the the germans, and the Irish from the English. How come one is labelled hero's and the others dangerous terrorists?”

  Well, if you believe opposition to Hitler’s Nazi forces in one’s own country constitutes “terrorism,” you are free to do so. I, on the other hand, hold quite a different view.

  “By mentioning apostates I did not mean the techniques that they use, I meant the way in which they are viewed. May jw's despise them, and flee from them scared because 'they are dangerous to their faith'. And yet many apostates used to feel like this but are here now. The same situation viewed from two different viewpoints giving totally different outcomes.”

  Again, not getting your point. You are free to hate anyone you wish. You can have whatever “viewpoint” you want. But when you try to kill a person who is simply part of an organization, you are a terrorist. Degree has *everything* to do with terroism.
• 

  blacksheep

  “I agree that Saddam was a terrorism but there is little or no evidence that he had anything to do with Sep 11”

  I never said he did. I said he fits the description of a terrorist. For gosh sakes, I just read in my local newspaper a hospital official complaining about how things are not getting done, records are not being kept, now that Saddam is not in power. “Democracy” has made us lazy, the guy complained. Why? Because before people were in utter terror if they didn’t do things right. Now, there’s no one forcing them to follow procedures. Okay…democracy does come with a price. Saddam was a terrorist. Bin Laden was a terrorist. People who instigating bombings against the US, UN, and other nations are terrorists. We’re talking about definitions of terrorism. And I think most soulful, responsible, spiritual people know what that constitutes.

  “If the definition is that a terrorist spreads terror then what of our own countries who hype up the risk of attack and make people more terrified in order to increas support for their cause? Does this constitute a milder form of terrorism?”

  People aren’t stupid (at least I believe). We in the US experienced 9-11. Okay, that was new for us. We had to be hit over the head to see that there are extremely powerful, insidious, groups out there who wish to do us harm. I for one applaud the exodus of Saddam and his likes. He was an incredible despot. I think some of the people here, quite amazingly, are defending him and his “sovereign state.” Why? I haven’t a clue. I welcome hearing their positions about why he should still be in power.
• 

  blacksheep

  "So who are the terrorists in Palestine? Again it depends on who's side your on. Also I agree with the point that anyone that kills innocent men, woman and children are terrorists."

  I think it is abundantly clear that "terrorism" here exists on BOTH sides. Their tactics, quite frankly, are not the hallmark of civilized society. I think few people in the US support EITHER side in bombings of innocent people.
• 

  Gadget

  I’m wondering, are you sympathetic to Hitler’s regime,

  Certainly not. I am however very much against people who put a slant on other peoples actions, such as the wtbs calling all who are against them apostate and evil, or governments calling people who retaliate against them terrorists. When they call people this they bring to mind 911 or similar. The Iraqis blowing up the UN is a terrorist act, but the Allies doing similar things(ie, blowing up hospitals, schools, ect) is collateral damage. I don't see the distinction, they are all wrong. War is a very bad thing. I believe Sadam should have been removed from power, but in 1990.

  You can have whatever “viewpoint” you want.

  But if it doesn't agree with yours you'll label them a nazi.
• 

  blacksheep

  “Certainly not. I am however very much against people who put a slant on other peoples actions, such as the wtbs calling all who are against them apostate and evil, or governments calling people who retaliate against them terrorists.”

  You really are mixing oranges and apples. You can call whomever you want “evil,” “apostate,” or whatever. Fine and dandy. But when you KILL them and instigate violent acts against them, then you are a terrorist. Do you think that 9-11 represented a valid “retaliation” against the US?

  “ When they call people this they bring to mind 911 or similar. The Iraqis blowing up the UN is a terrorist act, but the Allies doing similar things(ie, blowing up hospitals, schools, ect) is collateral damage. I don't see the distinction, they are all wrong. War is a very bad thing. I believe Sadam should have been removed from power, but in 1990. “

  Well, sorry, I cannot go back to re-write history for you. I sense you (as I warned in my original message) seem to be anti-war, no matter what the reason. Hard to have an intelligent discussion if that’s what you believe. Sorry, but just because Saddam wasn’t removed from power in 1990, doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t deal with the reality of today.

  You can have whatever “viewpoint” you want.

  “But if it doesn't agree with yours you'll label them a nazi.”

  When did I label anyone a nazi? I simply pointed out that people who felt that French dissident action to German occupation was NOT tantamount to the situation in Iraq for many, many reasons. You, however, have failed to explain the similarity.