posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:30 AM
This is a pretty difficult question! I think that the problem is that there is no "Black or White" definition, right and wrong in this case are all
shades if grey.
Anyone who fights for a cause, be it political, religious or material has set themselves in direct conflict with an opposing idea. This can result in
violence, initially against an opposition, then progressively the violence spreads to intimidate or kill anyone who hasn't picked a side or simply
wants to live a "normal" life.
The Americans today see the Independence movemant and victory as a revolution resulting in freedom and democracy. At the time many, predominantly
American colonists, saw them as rebels and terrorists determined to plunge north America into a civil war. The revolutionaries also recieved
substantial quantities of money and weapons from France, who had only a few years before been at war with the British and American colonists.
The current rulers of Iran were once regarded as "freedom fighters", fighting against the rule of the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (who had himself
been brought to power by a joint CIA and MI6 operation and was abandoned by the Western powers when the Revolution struck) and the SAVAK secret
police. However, once the Mullahs took control it became very clear, very quickly that perhaps the pre-revolutionary government should have been
Sadly, the terrorist will always consider himself to be a freedom fighter. To be a freedom fighter an individual will have to be a bit of a terrorist
and tyrant, to fight for a cause you must have total conviction in it's justification. Any act is justifiable in order to defeat the enemy, who quite
simply MUST be in the wrong. An innocent dies? Well, that's not your fault is it? If the (insert enemy of choice here) had given up and refused to
fight back the innocent wouldn't have died in the first place! Tragically people can justify acts of horror to themselves if they think they are in
Sorry to ramble, to sum up, freedom fighters and terrorists are groups with some popular support in the areas they inhabit, as soon as they encounter
people who disagree with them the "freedom fighter" act starts to fall away leaving an arrogant, selfish brute.