DC - Terrorist or Freedom Fighter? - Page 3

Arent you contradicting your own views now of "Ku Klux Klan were generally peaceful" and resorted to violence only as a last method. 😉
Anyway, The Klan arose to protect the Southern whites. Their opposition was against anyone who threatened their way of life. and how is a fight against the carpetbaggers any less than a Freedom Struggle. Weren;t they fighting for the same cause as the soldiers of the South in the civil war. How can that be personal grudge!! And please let us not get into the argument of whther the civil war was a indeed to abolish slavery and a war against rascism. We will digress with no hope of turning back. 😃

precisely mist, which is why i did not elaborate as to whether the klan was violent, which of course i dont believe they were. they got there after warnings, but that is not our debate. so i let that pass. nor are we ddebating whether the civil was to abolish slavary. you pointed that the klan was deemed terrorist and i would like to ask you as to which country looks upon them as martyrs? most americans still call them terrorists and puts them along with the carpet baggers and all other elements that came by during and after the war.

therefore our stand, that when you indulge in terrorist activities and terrorism, you remain a terrorist in the eyes of the entire world. you do not become a martyr and there are no two ways about how the world sees you.

the ku klux klan? 😕 the civil war? 😕
how did we get there?...am i in the right place?
😆
well newaizz lets get baq 2 OUR topic.

the best example to use here would be the suicide bombers of the middle east. they consider themselver martyrs. they think they r sacrificing themselves for their country and for God. we think they are terrorists because they are blowing up bombs in civilian areas killing many innocent lives (including their own).ok so as of now both sides ahould agree with me? right?

i may seem like i am backing away from my point of view but im not. these people are TERRORISTS! they were brainwashed at a very young age to think that what they did was right and that they should do it because they will be rewarded in heaven and what not. what these people are doing is not right! sadly, they will not be prasied by God or be given as high a status as they r told. Suicide in Islam is considered a HUGE sin. we were given life by God and only he can take it away from us. It is such a large "crime" that during the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)sum1 commited suicide and he refused to lead or even particip8 in tht person's funeral prayer and last rites and he urged others to do the same. these ppl claim to be "religious" ppl hu r willing 2 do nething in da name of "God" even give up their lives. They do not know as much about their religion as they claim to know. they are innocent people (usually young...even aroung my age or younger). you really cannot blame these people 4 being suicide bombers. children are easily brainwashed and that is what was done with these children. if some1 constantly tells u tht an apple is an orange ever since you are 4 0r 5 you will eventually start to believe that the apple actually is an orange.
the real people at fault are the older ppl the innocent children " 2 carry out their bad deeds and label it as "religion" to make their work seem "pious" so that no1 frm tht society considers them "terrorists" they know what they are doing is wrong. they know that branding them terrorists is appropriate and they deserve the title. but who wants to admit they r at fault? so instead of giving up their wrong ways of dealing with life and its "problems" they find it more convenient to convince people that they are right and it is honorable..when in reality these suicide bombers will get nothing of what their "bosses" promised them.

yea media influence and propaganda are sooo big tht people (especially those who r kept away from the rest of the world and are not allowed 2 think 4 thmselves and have only 1 EXTREMELY biased viewpoint thrown at them) will believe what they hear regardless of its validity.

they are terrorrists, here there and everywhere! they will be terrorists where ever they go. No terrorist can be titled a "freedom fighter" and a soldier-freedom fighter cannot be titled a terrorist!

The African National congress, the prominent party of South Africa now , was accused of terrorist activities. The ANC was a moderate organization but on the official sanction of aparthied in SA turned to terrorist activities as an aid in their struggle against racial inequality. Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence. He never apologized for the horrific violation of human rights that he admitted was committed during ANC's campaign against racial discrimination.
Like I said before, there is no justification to their means to the end.

But before we judge anyone, before we publicly condemn the struggles and sacrfices ,let us understand why comon people, youths like you and me were driven to such extreme means. Let us understand their times, their circumstances and their motives. Every war is not a struggle of good over evil. Every terrorist misdeed is not a crime of mindless hatred. When we argur for the motion we do not aim to glorify tragedies, we do not aim to make martyrs of rebels. But we do plead to look beyond the branding , to look at the very roots and realize that such groups stem from man's basic struggle for his fundamental rights.

Originally posted by: mist

.....

But before we judge anyone, before we publicly condemn the struggles and sacrfices ,let us understand why comon people, youths like you and me were driven to such extreme means. Let us understand their times, their circumstances and their motives. Every war is not a struggle of good over evil. Every terrorist misdeed is not a crime of mindless hatred. When we argur for the motion we do not aim to glorify tragedies, we do not aim to make martyrs of rebels. But we do plead to look beyond the branding , to look at the very roots and realize that such groups stem from man's basic struggle for his fundamental rights.

well said and very articulately put. but when a crime of mindless hatred is committed, when the common man joins groups or bands out of fear, and work towards instilling fear, those acts which are condemned by more than half the world - those acts are generally deemed as acts of terrorism - a mans struggle for his basic rights and fundamental ones are not called terrorist activities.  the guerilla warfare in the congo has no name left to be called except for terrorism.  the war rages on, women and children sold, raped killed etc, while they contiue to struggle to find a days meal!  the guerilla groups are by no means fighting for fundamental rights, but the common man who lives around the area (if you can call it living) are still fighting for their right to stay alive.

please do not mix up the struggle for living, fighting for basic fundamental rights from the people who have taken your land away etc along with cold calculated terrorist activities!

Originally posted by: ~PaKi*PrInCeZ~

i completely agree with jasunap and mkzara

killing people for the sake of "pleasure" or "personal gain" is terrorism. Soldiers are not considered terrorists by anyone and they cannot be considered terrorists. Jusb because they are fighting strangers and will kill them does not mean they are terrorists for anyone. when 2 equipped sides fight...both are equal. they are there to fight each other and both sides are equally "right" or "wrong" based on their viewpoint....so neither is a terrorist. 

heartgirl...you are trying to say that soldiers are terrorists 4 the other side but they defin8ly r not....wen 2 countries r @ war...v all noe tht ppl frm both ends will die and tht both ends r fighting so neither side has the right 2 call the other side a terrorist a criminal...the ppl hu die during war r martyrs..and the ppl hu kill thm r not murderers or terrorists...they r soldiers

terrorists dont care abt the country or themselves or nething....they r a bunch of radical ppl hu have nuttin better 2 do thn kill ppl and they try 2 justify it as being "freedom fighters" and benefiting their country but we all know it isnt....with media support these ppl are successful in convincing many people (like heartgil and others) that they are actually "freedom fighters" infact they r nuttin but terrorists...they can go newhere they want and they will alwaiiz b terrorists

ur saying that media is the one who is influencing pplz mindz. ok i think there is something called education which helps us distinguish bw wats rite and rong and if the news channels of the whole world are saying the same thing then u can t refuse to accept the truth.Is evry news channel the same?? it means that we cant trust any woah. Not evry press department are wid the terrorrists. The main root r the politians, in the developing countries u can buy poor people any time ( not all but still) they ll say u tell the police thatu were involved in this and ur family will get this much money after they ll arrest u .." Developing Countries "<--- the word is not that simple as it seems.. Media can b seen as corrupt in some cases But Politics is behind evrything...

Are those ppl who bombed London terrorists? i don think so.. According to thier families, they were one of those nice or inncent type of ppl who had neva done anything rong in thier lives.. they had bn brainwashed.. is it easy to plan the whole thing without the government(not london govt but i gueess those terrorists have a really bif foundation at the back whoz supplying them bombs and artillery.) they live thier whole lives hiding from this world .. then where do they get the weapon supply from?? Government?? where do they get the money from?? Government!

Guys there is a very simple answer to all the questions posed here. A terrorist is someone who will hurt someone innocent for a cause noble or not. The distinction between a terrorist and a soldier is that a soldier a true one wwill only fight a soldier who is equipped like him. When two soldiers battle it is equal because they both usually believe in their cause and r fighting for it. Soldiers atttacking people and civilians is an act of terrorism but not attacking other soldiers. As Jasunap said in a war people from both sides die but if they are soldiers who r only fighting people who r equal to them in strength and weaponry then why would they be terrorists. Yes they r killing someoen but it is not mass murder to achieve a political gain. Its is not means to a political end. A terrorist is someone who wants something but instead of fighting for it in a calm and peaceful and civil manner they fight for it by hurting innocents. That is the distinction. The innocents' death is wrong no matter where they r from. I dont believe even if u have a noble cause u have a right to hurt anyone who isn't at fault. Even for a noble cause there are rules such as dont attack those who cant defend themselves, dont attack those who r weaker and etc. A terrorist doesn't care about these rules and someone who will take the life of an innocent human is wrong no matter what their cause. I believe that most people understand that. A palestinian going and blowing himself up in an israeli restaurant is wrong but so is an israeli soldier shooting a sixteen year old for no other reason than possible threat. Both sides should view this as terrorism because an attack on one innocent is an attack on all of us. Someone who will hurt another who has done nothing can be no one's freedom fighter. Just because someone considers them that the fact doens't change that they r terrorist if they hurt innocent people.

then say if 2 terrorist groups clah both equally equipped wat wud u call that?

The big question is who has the right to label anyone as "terrorist"?? If you see around, the people who have been given the great title of terrorist are the ones who were born in war zones. They are affected by the war, even when they were in their mother's wombs. They have been listening to gun fires, bombing, and crying from day one. They are viewing dead bodies, mass killing of there close ones, blood spread all around them.

 

It is proved by psychologist that, what little kids see, listens and feels in their early childhood, it affects and shape up their future. A child who losses his parents in his early age, he/she will be affected badly, and will obviously want to take revenge, because his/her parents were only killed because they were from certain country or from certain religion. That rage and fire starts burning from that moment, and it keeps burning. He wants to get rid of all those who are killing his people.

 

Soldiers are not terrorists, but the people who are giving them instructions are terrorists. I will take the example of USA. Bush is the biggest terrorist in the present world. He attacked Afghanistan for no reason, and then he attacked Iraq and destroyed it all over. When people wanted to take revenge, he labeled them as terrorist. 

 

Bush, un keh ghar main ja kar, un per humla karta hai, jab woh jawab main kuch actions lehtye hain, to protect their land and their identity, he calls them Terrorist. In 9/11's attack, not even of the people died compared to people who were killed in "War against Terrorism". Masoom logoon keh gharoon per attack karma terror hai! Masoom logoon ko bilawaja marna terror hai!

 

Agar who Masoom log self defense main kuch kartye hain, tu they are called terrorists!!

 

 

Lets not go in the past, lets talk about the present, so we can protect the future of millions of innocent in Iraq and Afghanistan, who don't know that if they will see next day's dawn or not.

 

48 hrs r up..aparna di or sam or sum1 shud close this topic now

it was fun debating with all of you. you all are great debators and i enjoyed agreeing/disagreeing with all of u...may the best of us win.


👏 2 all da debators