View Poll Results: Do you agree with the statement?

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    29 54.72%
  • No

    24 45.28%
Page 33 of 40 FirstFirst ... 233132333435 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 399

Thread: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

  1. #321
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    Oh, you would know about dodging questions wouldn't you
    Nice try. Dishionest and pathetic, but nice.

  2. #322
    R.I.P. Léo
    bub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    05-17-12 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,649

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I don't think them shoving people in gas chambers really qualifies them to speak about freedom
    During the war it wasn't terrorism, they had an uniform, it was an army. Thus it was just "war".

    Maybe the bombings of London & Manchester during the Blitz could be called "terrorism" (because their goal was to frighten civilians and make them stop supporting Churchill), just like the bombings of Hamburg, Dresden or Tokyo could be called "terrorism" (these cities were not military objectives, the goal was to kill as many people as possible)

  3. #323
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    05-17-16 @ 11:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    How does this differ from people that would force women to wear burkhas, and stone them to death if they do not?
    You really want me to define the difference between a few Muslim women wearing extra cloth and attempting to wipe out a group of people? REALLY?

  4. #324
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    05-17-16 @ 11:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by bub View Post
    During the war it wasn't terrorism, they had an uniform, it was an army. Thus it was just "war".

    Maybe the bombings of London & Manchester during the Blitz could be called "terrorism" (because their goal was to frighten civilians and make them stop supporting Churchill), just like the bombings of Hamburg, Dresden or Tokyo could be called "terrorism" (these cities were not military objectives, the goal was to kill as many people as possible)
    I wouldn't bother Bub he wouldn't accept that answer, im close to unsubscribing to this thread. This will just go on and on and on

  5. #325
    R.I.P. Léo
    bub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    05-17-12 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,649

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I wouldn't bother Bub he wouldn't accept that answer, im close to unsubscribing to this thread. This will just go on and on and on
    Don't feel obliged to answer him...

  6. #326
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    You really want me to define the difference between a few Muslim women wearing extra cloth and attempting to wipe out a group of people? REALLY?
    Yes. That is exactly what I want.

    I want you to tell me the difference between the murdering oppressors that 'cannot speak about freedom', and the murdering oppressors that CAN 'speak about freedom'.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 02-10-09 at 12:12 PM.

  7. #327
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    05-17-16 @ 11:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    **** that, if you really want me to define the difference between ethnic cleansing and a few extra cloths this discussion is not worth continuing.

  8. #328
    Sage
    Infinite Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,357

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Because it is a red herring.
    No, it is absolutely pertinent. There was a similar movement previously to overthrow the tyranny of the Shah of Iran's regime. That led to the Ayatollah Khomeini and his version of Iran.

    We may not like it but millions of Iranians chose their style of govt.

  9. #329
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    09-25-16 @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Infinite Chaos View Post
    Agreed, there were atrocities on both sides during the early 20th Century - both by the IRA and by the British soldiers there.
    I'm not as familiar with IRA brutality in the early 20th century. From all my readings on it, it appears that they mostly targeted the RIC and British magistrates, while typically avoiding civilian casualties, mostly using a guerilla campaign.

    Admittedly, my studies on this subject have pretty much come from Irish sources, so I'm not denying that IRA attrocities occured, I'm just not very familiar with them.

    Do you have any links or sources I could see describing the IRA attrocities in the early part of the 20th century?




    I'll give you this - Provisional IRA history
    BBC News | History | 1968-69: The troops are sent in


    Yes, I've watched some of the "truth and reconciliation" hearings which Archbishop Desmond Tutu chaired. What you have to recognise is the IRA and that includes Sinn Fein had to apologise to legitimise their quest for parliamentary power. I'm glad they did - they had a bad history involving brutality within the catholic community - they controlled the drugs trade etc.
    The IRA-drug stuff is pretty damned complicated. They had the Direct Action Against Drugs front that went around killing drug dealers and scared people away form dealing drugs. Some studies have claimed that the pIRA was a primary deterrent for drug use in Northern Ireland, and that their decreased activities after the ceasefire have been a contributing factor in Ireland's overall increase in drug use.

    Groups like INLA were well known drug smugglers etc.

    At the same time, it is well know that IRA operatives like Thomas "slab" Murphy were engaged in illegal smuggling and money Laundering operations.



    However, you will find very few ex servicemen (myself included) who will talk of their call of service in Northern Ireland - we are still targets even though the IRA is no more involved in an up front campaign.
    If you did a stint up in NI, my hat is off to you.



    That's a rose tinted review of history I'm afraid. Of course the political leadership and others of nearly every terrorist group is kept away from the frontline atrocities and plans - that's the job of splinter cells and the way modern terror groups are organised.
    I'm not saying that the pIRA was not a terrorist group overall. Any leaders that were involved with sanctioning terrorist acts would still be terrorists. The fact is that not every individual who was on the ground was engaging in terrorism.

    I was talking about individuals who may have engaged in violence without ever targetting civilians.



    I'm guessing your point is the British Army in Northern Ireland?
    If you are guessing that I' saying that teh British Army was "the worst terrorist organization in Northern Ireland", I must say of course not. They are pretty much the only combatant group that didn't engage in terrorism as a tactic.

    The British forces hold the very best civilian to combatant ratio of all the combatant groups in NI. Far better than the IRA. In this case, I was actually thinking of the UVF and the various Loyalist paramilitary groups as the "worst" of all the terrorist organizations in NI.(1019 total killings, 712 classified as civilians)



    Now if you are guessing that I am calling the British army "combatants" and not civilians, I would say that yes they were. But I wasn't just calling the British Army the "combatants". The RUC and various paramilitary orginazations are all combatants as well.





    Finally, I'm not saying that the pIRA was not a terrorist group as a whole. There is far too much evidence of civilian targeting to even try to play that game.

    What I've been saying is that an individual's membership in the IRA alone is not enough to label that individual as a "terroist". It is true that some individual who were IRA members and did engage in violence, do not qualify as terrorists themselves because they would not target civilians.

    One thing I'm not doing is trying to glorify the pIRA as a group of "freedom fighters". There were some members who actually were "freedom fighters" that did not engage in terroism, but the over-all group as a whole was still a terrorist organization because it did engage in terrorism.


    The only "organization" that was involved in the whole thing that I would not lable as a terrorist group would be the British Army.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  10. #330
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    **** that, if you really want me to define the difference between ethnic cleansing and a few extra cloths this discussion is not worth continuing.
    That's what I thought you' eventually do -- run away.

    Your failure to carry your own water illustrates that even YOU understand your position that murderous theocratic oppressors, when fighting for the power to impose that murderous theocratic oppression upon others, can indeed be 'freedom fighters' is a sad, pathetic joke.

    Tell me:
    If the Taliban were Christians, would you hold the same position?
    Or does your position cover only murderous, theocratic oppression in the name of Allah?
    Last edited by Goobieman; 02-10-09 at 12:25 PM.

Page 33 of 40 FirstFirst ... 233132333435 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •