It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is the difference between a Terrorist and a Ressistance fighter?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 12:39 AM
link   
It would seem to me that labels are one of the major problems in such a group. I in no way make referance to any sort of violence, crime, or sociopathic traits, I'm merely stating that anyone can engage in anonymous and intelligent conversation, but the very topic of discussion insists that action be taken. Preparations must be made. If ones motives, i.e. love, freedom, morality, etc., are right, than labels are inconsequential. Actions speak louder than words.




posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 01:31 AM
link   
People are trying to parse words and actions which sound nice, have great rings to them, but have nothing to do with the reality of war and the struggle for life.

Freedom fighters attack only governments, but not civilians..?? show me a government that consists strictly of military officials? Government employees ARE civilians.
Were the french underground freedom fighters? they lured thousands of Nazis to their death, because they were an occupying force. We call them freedom fighters because ultimately france was liberated and Free again. Otherwise they would be terrorists.

When America finally leaves Iraq ( what a horrific mistake), and the groups in Iraq fight it out amounst themselves and finally settle, those we call terrorists will be known as freedom fighters among their people.

Perspectives change depending on where you stand.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   
What's the difference? None.
But im adding regular soldiers too in this bunch.

Terrorist: brainwashed. Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/personal trauma
Ressistance fighter: brainwashed.
Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/personal trauma
Soldier: brainwashed. Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/orders/personal trauma/social status

I once believed that there is a difference. Not anymore.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   
A resistance fighter attacks military targets to push thier agenda.


A terrorist will attack anyone and anything to push an agenda.


The big difference is a terrorist will plant a bomb in a crowded market and kill civilians.

The resistance fighter will plant a bomb or attack the military that opposes them.

And to the first poster who said he was smarter than Americans, as we don't understand the difference. Thanks for loooking down with and feeling smug.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
What's the difference? None.
But im adding regular soldiers too in this bunch.

Terrorist: brainwashed. Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/personal trauma
Ressistance fighter: brainwashed.
Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/personal trauma
Soldier: brainwashed. Driven by ideology/emotions/ignorance/orders/personal trauma/social status


Precisely. These three are inseperable. The delusion that one of these is somehow morally superior has no root in reality and is made distinct by ones bias, be you soldier, terrorist or freedom fighter.

Innocents die through ACTION irrespective of intent.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 11:35 AM
link   
no one here, i assume, is interested in pursuing anything more than discussion. Keep in mind, i make no talk of crime or disestablishment, merely preperation.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Basically, I guess we can all agree on the fact that regardless of how one views or labels themselves, their true image is based solely on the general concesus of what he/ she appears to be, or the mass's preconceived notions on what a person such as that should be.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 07:46 AM
link   
my opinion of course but

difference is in the "views" of the "eye of the beholder"

one side is going view the the other side in a different matter no matter if their cause is right or wrong thats the problem

one man's terrorist is a another man's freedom fighter

not saying that both or right but i'm also not saying that both are wrong either

it all depends on what side of the cookie jar you are on

both use violence and acts of violence as an method to achieve their objectives and to defeat their opponents

in most cases both are consider or viewed as "outcast" by either the opposing government or opposition in which they are trying to oppose for rule, power, etc.

the term "terror" "terrorism" etc. is nothing really new it's been around since the dawn of man and used thought out history

unfortunately the term "terrorist" has become the new "communist"

its more of an "cliche" now just like through out the "COLD WAR" when the term "communist" was miss used alot

its something that the "media" and "politicians" use to brainwash the public on a needless basis just for their own personally agenda(money, power, ratings, votes, sex, drugs and rock n roll etc.)

recent examples show us how both the terms are used and miss used

SOUTH AFRICA 1948-1990
the ruling apartheid government vs anti-apartheid groups such as the A.N.C. etc.

now for years the world turn a blind as apartheid ran its ugly head, guess since they were not "communist" they where A OK, hmmm?


when groups such as the A.N.C. formed to opposed the rule, the government quickly cast them off as "terrorist", but in their eyes themselves as freedom fighters

MANDELA was sentence to 27 years in prison and banned a "communist terrorist" by the SA government because i guess it was just the thing to do at the time
yeah sure

but yet seen as a "freedom fighter" by his people

MANDELA went on to win the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE in 93, G go figure that one out "communist terrorist wins NOBEl"


AFGHANISTAN 1979-1989
the SOVIET UNION vs the AFGHAN MUJAHIDEEN
now this sounds familiar "big evil empire" vs so called "islamic extremist"

now at the time so called "free world"
was in up roar over the invasion and SOVIET occupation

(cough) only because AFGHAN rebels where not "communist terrorist" but do keep in mind that later on some of these rebels would later become the TALIBAN

the USSR justification and stance to the invasion was that they were there to help support the existing government the PDPA against "anti-government terrorist"
sure

but again in the eyes of the "anti-government rebels" or "AFGHAN rebels" they were "freedom fighters"

NORTHERN IRELAND as it stands a ceasefire

PROTESTANTs vs CATHOLICs
the BRITISH government vs the I.R.A.

ISRAEL still on going
ISRAEL vs the P.L.O., P.I.J., HAMAS etc. etc.

well do i need to explain further?

see a pattern

[edit on 23-7-2006 by LAWNMOWERMAN]



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 11:04 AM
link   
A terrorist deliberately targets civilians with the purpose of terror.

A freedom fighter targets enemy forces with a strategic military purpose.



posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 12:39 PM
link   
A terrorist is someone who practices terrorism.
Terrorism is the use of high profile attacks that are specifically intended to instill fear in the civilian population. This is usually accomplished by leveraging media coverage of isolated and innovative attacks against targets with no military value. In effect, terrorist seek a political remedy through a form of extortion.
A Freedom fighter is someone who fight for freedom from opression. Sometimes the objectives of terrorists overlap with those of the freedom fighters. Most often they don't.

The Middle East is a region of the world that has been under foreign occupation for centuries. Do they hate freedom? of course not. do they hate democracy? no. Do they distrust Western Nations? definately!

US and british policy in the region has been much like beating a hornets nest with a stick. The British promised them freedom from the Turks. Then the British occupied their lands. They promised them Freedom from the Germans, then took their land to create the nation of Israel. We promise them Free elections, then impose severe economic sanctions when they don't elect who we want. We use a fabric of lies as an excuse to invade a foriegn nation, overthrow its government and attemp to put in a government of our choosing. ...
And through all of this, we expect them to be grateful.

I recall reading an interview with a Mexican farmer, that was recorded during the Mexican war of independence. The farmer said the revolutonaries came, took his crops, killed his livestock and left. Then the government soldiers came, took the rest of his crops, killed the rest of his livestock and left. Either way he lost.



[edit on 28-7-2006 by niklaus]



posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 10:47 AM
link   
The democratic electons like that of hamas are recognized...

Having said that, with that choice comes reponsiblity. If you elect a terrorist org into government don't be surprised when the rest of the world turns its back. Thats the choice they made now they can live with it. As if Israel is going to collect taxes for hamas...



posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by toolman


People are trying to parse words and actions which sound nice, have great rings to them, but have nothing to do with the reality of war and the struggle for life.

Freedom fighters attack only governments, but not civilians..?? show me a government that consists strictly of military officials? Government employees ARE civilians.

Perspectives change depending on where you stand.


Um, ok here it is in a nutshell....

If you walk into a cafe and blow yourself up your a terrorist no matter the perspective.

And just so you know I doubt people in Iraq will be happy with the (terrorist freedom fighters) considering that that almost the only people they kill are Iraqis... When you see the headline 40 killed in market in Bahgdad what makes you the iraqis are greatfull for these (freedom fighters/terrorists)

On occasion an american dies from an ied... However on a daily basis Iraqis are being killed by suicide bombers... So who are these "freedom fighters" trying to free... If the terrorists at least attacked a tank and some civs got klled its more understandable then a guy just walking into a market and blowing everyone up...

Plus they attack the Iraqi forces, if they just want us gone leave the iraqi forces alone the faster they get their stuff together the faster we leave.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join