[Fom]

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter - Discuss.



Received this today as an essay title and was told to write about it, what do you guys think? Thought it would be a good topic, do you agree? Disagree?
Should Bin Laden be looked at as just a terrorist? What about Robin Hood?






(Thought some light discussion would be cool)

[Tom]

What are they aiming to achieve exactly?

[Fom]

Originally posted by Tom
What are they aiming to achieve exactly?

Well we were giving this question to answer, and I think I get it.
Take Bin Laden as an example... too us he is a terrorist, but to the muslims in his home country he is a "freedom fighter" people respect him.

[bronaaaa]

Originally posted by Fom

Well we were giving this question to answer, and I think I get it.
Take Bin Laden as an example... too us he is a terrorist, but to the muslims in his home country he is a "freedom fighter" people respect him.

I don't understand why people feel the need to bomb things to get what they want though..

[sampmiller]

The people that see him as a "freedom fighter" are people that have been brainwashed into believing so - I personally hate anyone that feels the need to bomb innocent people - I shouldn't be scared about travelling on the underground, but I am!

[Z]

Originally posted by sampmiller
The people that see him as a "freedom fighter" are people that have been brainwashed into believing so - I personally hate anyone that feels the need to bomb innocent people - I shouldn't be scared about travelling on the underground, but I am!

I could be wrong, but I think the logic behind bombing the West is to atone for all the crimes that Western countries have/have supposedly committed against these countries. A lot of the hatred for Western countries is propaganda though, a terrorist might gain sympathy if he/she declares that somewhere in the East of the country, the USA destroyed an entire village - poor, local people of low intelligence aren't going to question that, especially if said terrorist is convincing. That might sound silly to people in the Western world, but you have to bear in mind that your average person in the middle east will be living in poorer areas than in the UK and might not be able to easily access the media - which itself could be brainwashing people.

People don't commit acts of terrorism to hurt other people, it's about making a statement. Obviously people get hurt, but that is not the point of the exercise.

[Shaun]

There's more than just one kind of "terrorist"...for example, the ETA terrorists have a totally different system of beliefs and demands to those of Al-Qaeda.

Oh and by the way - Robin Hood. Fictional.

[Z]

Originally posted by Shaun
There's more than just one kind of "terrorist"...for example, the ETA terrorists have a totally different system of beliefs and demands to those of Al-Qaeda.

Oh and by the way - Robin Hood. Fictional.

Yeah Al-Qaeda want things to go boom boom for no reason, ETA are more like "**** our homeland noobs boom boom"

[Fom]

Originally posted by Shaun
There's more than just one kind of "terrorist"...for example, the ETA terrorists have a totally different system of beliefs and demands to those of Al-Qaeda.

Oh and by the way - Robin Hood. Fictional.

I know but Robin hood is an example... If you was the Sherif then you would class him as a terrorist, but if you are a poor person getting money you class him as a Freedom fighter.

The whole prospect of this question tells you that... you view people because of the point of view you have. You are going to view people differently if you are poor or rich, or if you live in the east or west. Also maybe taking the terrorist word way from it and just making it mean something like... someone doing something evil?

Does the statement make more sense then?

[andyman]

Its complex with many factors... Its the real world and always been that way. You can learn to understand form the many complex points but nothing will ever change...
Is there a such thing as baddies and goodies? Did the nazis think they we're the bad guys?

[Sticks]

You need to look at the state in which the Freedom Fighter / Terrorist operates

Does it allow democracy or is it a totalitarian dictatorship. If someone is fighting under the latter, where there is no other way to express dissent then they might be classed as a freedom fighter. When they do fight, how selective are their targets, how severe is there response?

In the Robin Hood story the state is portrayed as oppressive and corrupt.


If however there is a free democratic state, such as Northern Ireland and Great Britain say, they are terrorists. There are peaceful and lawful means of dissent, so resorting to violence has no justification.

Where this standard model breaks down seems to be with Al-Qaeda, they are active over a number of states, some of which are multi-party democracies. There is no specific aim other than the forced conversion to their brand of Islam of every one and the destruction of the main western lifestyle.

[Llamajohn]

Originally posted by Fom
One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter - Discuss.



Received this today as an essay title and was told to write about it, what do you guys think? Thought it would be a good topic, do you agree? Disagree?
Should Bin Laden be looked at as just a terrorist? What about Robin Hood?






(Thought some light discussion would be cool)

wow, thats actually quite interesting.
I'll be thinking of that all day now haha.

[Nurse57]

An interesting one this.

It all depends on your own personal view point and what side of history you are taught.

Nelson Mandella. Most people see him as a hero as they agreed with what he stood for. He was involved with an organisation that was involved with violence and killings. But he did it for what he and the western world believed in.

Gerry Adams: Heavily involved with the IRA and was top level IRA army council. But as a member of Sinn Fein helped bring peace to Northern Ireland. So, terror or peace bringer?

Bin Laden. To the west an out and out terrorist. But some would see him as no different to Mandalla. Fighting a war to free his oppressed people.

One is loved by the west, the other is hated. What is the difference though?

[Marc]

Each religion/society to themselves I suppose! Wouldn't wanna start a fight but I cannot see any sense in wanting to kill other human beings ; its crazy. But hey, I obviously don't understand their religion

[andyman]

Its human nature to be part of a tribe and to kill when fuled with a passion to honor the tribe.

The victor is always right...

[Marc]

Originally posted by andyman
Its human nature to be part of a tribe and to kill when fuled with a passion to honor the tribe.

The victor is always right...

By coming into other peoples countries and killing people who have done nothing wrong??

[andyman]

Originally posted by Marcjswp

By coming into other peoples countries and killing people who have done nothing wrong??

Aint life a b!tch. Its always been that way... In the real world who are the bad guys and who are the good guys? Its about who wins nothing else.

[bananarama]

Freedom fighters so called that use terror on none combatents are not freedom fighters they are anti freedom fighters.....

You can only be called a freedom fighter if you are trying to free something. Modern day terrorists on the other hand are fighting to take freedom away........

[ange7]

Originally posted by andyman
Its human nature to be part of a tribe and to kill when fuled with a passion to honor the tribe.

The victor is always right...

lol ... wrong as usual andy

justifying violent hate crimes as "natural" and as part of "human nature". The human race have moved on from the stone age andy ... come join us hehehe .. no just kidding.... DON'T.
Humans have other option besides mindless violence, hate and murder .... evolution has given us a brain capable of reason.... we can discuss, compromise, understand and heaven forbid ( lol and I think it does!) empathise with other humans.
"a passion to honor the tribe"
your a disgrace to your "tribe"

PS

ADMIN don't give me another 24 hr ban for pointing out a racist who for post after post tries his best to incite hate.

[Fom]

Originally posted by bananarama
Freedom fighters so called that use terror on none combatents are not freedom fighters they are anti freedom fighters.....

You can only be called a freedom fighter if you are trying to free something. Modern day terrorists on the other hand are fighting to take freedom away........

I disagree, terrorists are fighting for their own freedom, all terrorist attacks so far have come with a warning with "leave our country alone" we don't and we get bombed again and again.
To be fair, you would think the government would catch on. Read any un biased articles on terrorist attacks and it will mention it, even recently it still happens, the terrorist attacks that were to happen on canary wharf and heathrow all came with warnings of "Leave our country alone, stop killing people" they dont even care that they got caught and cant blow up the buildings... they got the media coverage they wanted.

[Barbie]

i can see how the two can be linked but there are other ways to fight for freedom (not that im sure what alquaeda are fighting for) than to use violence against innocent people living in the country the terrorists are fighting against.. they therefore have no justification to kill innocent people... especially seems as their faith comes into it alot and i dont think their faith will agree with what they are doing

[Fom]

Originally posted by Barbie-big-bro
i can see how the two can be linked but there are other ways to fight for freedom (not that Im sure what alquaeda are fighting for) than to use violence against innocent people living in the country the terrorists are fighting against.. they therefore have no justification to kill innocent people... especially seems as their faith comes into it alot and i dont think their faith will agree with what they are doing

I was told that in the muslim religion there is a god that tells them if there is anyone attempting to stop them from practicing their religion they are allowed to retaliate with violence as long as it is for that reason.
Not too sure about freedom and it seems muslims are twisting the Qu'ran to suit them, but its common sense that when you get backed into a corner you fight back. Yes maybe blowing innocent people up isnt the best idea but how else are they going to get any attention? Our media is so biased that they would never put an article favoring the freedom fighters, doesnt anyone else think if we took all troops out of their countries this would stop? They are not blowing people up just for the sake of it.

We are doing just as bad, more innocent iraqi's have died in this war than innocent people in terrorist attacks.

[LargeAndInCharge]

i dont really like to talk about terrorists as i just get really wound up and pissed off as there all james blunts

but if anyone ever wanted to i would give my honest opinion, not a biased one as such

[Fom]

Originally posted by LargeAndInCharge
i dont really like to talk about terrorists as i just get really wound up and p****d off as there all james blunts

but if anyone ever wanted to i would give my honest opinion, not a biased one as such

Well you would be biased, your brother is in the army lol.

[LargeAndInCharge]

but i can adapted to that and try and look at the whole situation as a whole from both sides