• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Do you agree with the statement?

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 57.5%
  • No

    Votes: 17 42.5%

  • Total voters
    40
I don't know. Saudis seem quite happy. You are an outsider looking in, you see things differently then they do. They would rather have an oppressive theocracy then, an unstable country, or a group of Christians debasing their religion.

Yes, I'm sure women love walking around with their entire bodies covered and not being allowed to drive or go anywhere alone.

Yes, those mean ole nasty Christians are much more oppressive than muslim society.

That's funny.
 
So you are saying that you cannot be a terrorist and a freedom fighter at the same time? I disagree.

The problem arises when you have people claiming to be freedom fighters and every time you say ok lets sit down and work out a workable solution they respond by blowing something up insuring the talks will fail. These particular brand of freedom fighters want their freedom at the expense of removing another's peoples freedom.

Moe
 
What they want is the "freedom" to instill their brand of oppressive rule. Actual freedom for the people they claim to represent is a myth.
 
Yes, they did. However, their ideals that produced the US Constitution led to the eradiation of slavery.

For you to be consistent in your logic here you'll have to give the terrorists a 100 years. ;)
 
Yes, I'm sure women love walking around with their entire bodies covered and not being allowed to drive or go anywhere alone.

Yes, those mean ole nasty Christians are much more oppressive than muslim society.

That's funny.

You should do a bit of research before you decide what Muslim women think about their culture:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/28/international/middleeast/28hughes.html

Sept. 27 - The audience - 500 women covered in black at a Saudi university - seemed an ideal place for Karen P. Hughes, a senior Bush administration official charged with spreading the American message in the Muslim world, to make her pitch.
============
"The general image of the Arab woman is that she isn't happy," one audience member said. "Well, we're all pretty happy." The room, full of students, faculty members and some professionals, resounded with applause.


BBC NEWS | Middle East | My life in Saudi: Rosana

Saudi Arabian Women Dispel Myths and Stereotypes


I think your problem is that you are trying to put your synthetic ideals of happiness, and seeing how they fair in another environment and it turns out negatively becuase it is something you are not used to.
I am writing an academic paper on happiness; as there is a truly remarkable system in which humans create happiness, even in the most dramatic/traumatic of situations.
 
Freedom Fighter, to me is a left leaning biased word used by left leaning media. Communism has always advocated emancipation, and freedom from the bourgeois society and transitioning into a classless society. Lenin, Mao, and Castro are commonly labelled as sorts of Freedom Fighters, but are they really? They purged millions of men, women and even children because they were 'counterrevolutionary" or just because they criticised the Government. They led their respective nations into poverty, war and famine, instead of bringing in freedom, they instead suppressed their people.

Freedom Fighter is just a term used by Left leaning people in order to make people such as Lenin, Mao and Castro seem like an acceptable person, and that their actions were justified.

I'd call all three of them Terrorists, actually, I'd call them tyrants.

Freedom fighter is a term used to describe someone fighting for freedom from something. Don't waste your time trying to turn this into a partisan issue.
 
What they want is the "freedom" to instill their brand of oppressive rule. Actual freedom for the people they claim to represent is a myth.
That is what everyone who has ever led a resistance in the history of mankind has wanted. They break free and either flee to another locale or usurp those in powers, setting up their own form of government.
 
Meh, I'd only giving them four score and 7 years.

Give or take a couple.

I wanted to say 10 score, but I was limited to slavery. :mrgreen:
 
If Hamas never deployed terrorist tactics with the intent to kill civilians they would not be considered terrorist. Hamas is responsible for suicide attacks targeting civilians. These attacks deliberatly target civilians that is why they are terrorist. There people may call them a resistence movement but they are terrorist plan and simple.

You know, we used to have a terrorist movement here in the UK (there have been lots actually) not so long ago - called the IRA. They carried out bombings to kill civilians - I will concede they sometimes phoned the police to warn them of where their bombs were so innocent civilians could be evacuated but often they didn't.

1973 - 10 car bombs left to kill innocent civilians. 2 were found but eventually 1 innocent killed and 180 injured.

1974 - bomb on a coach carrying soldiers AND their families, 11 dead.

1974 - first of the pub bombs (bombs placed in public bars) kills 2 soldiers, 3 civilians and injures 50.

1974, - second series of pub bombings, this time in Birmingham kills 21.

Series of small atacks continue in England but next major attack is 1984 - when the IRA tied to assassinate Margaret Thatcher and the UK Govt with the Brighton bombs.

1993 - Warrington, bomb kills two children

1993 - Warrington, bombs on gas meters (first of the economic target attacks)

1993 - IRA returns to bomb London, attacking the "city" financial district. Bishopsgate attacked

1996 - Canary Wharf, yet another civilian target bombed. 2 killed.

1997 - Arndale centre, Manchester bombed injuring 200 people.

I'm not even touching IRA bombings in Northern Ireland - far too many to count but you do also know the IRA received money, support and weapons from the US through NORAID, marches by known terrorists were held in America?

You obviously have a thing about Hamas, all I'm asking is that you recognise that your outrage against Hamas and their targeting civilians is only following what countless other terrorist organisations have done. I'm fairly certain if Hamas held marches in the US however or set up fundraising that your reaction would probably be quite different.

It's all, as was mentioned on page one - about perspective.
 
--snip--I'm fairly certain if Hamas held marches in the US however or set up fundraising that your reaction would probably be quite different --snip--
Hamas is listed as a FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) by the United States government --snip--

Agreed, but if that is counterpoint to mention of the IRA walking around freely in the US and getting money and weapons then this may help -

Q: Why isn't the IRA on the list?

There is a strong body of evidence documenting historic IRA involvement in terrorist activity. This evidence precedes the time, two years ago, when we first considered designating the IRA as an FTO.

At that time, the Secretary of State took note of the IRA's unequivocal cease-fire, as well as the subsequent decision by the British government that the cease-fire was "genuine in word and deed." This permitted Sinn Fein to join inclusive, all-party talks in Belfast.

The peace process in Northern Ireland continues, albeit not without obvious difficulties, and we have again determined that the IRA should not be designated at this time. We are, however, concerned over recent indications of increased terrorist activity in Northern Ireland, and we will continue to monitor closely the activities of all paramilitary groups.

Q: What happens if the IRA carries out another act of terrorism, such as killing a police officer or blowing up a police station?

We will not speculate on hypothetical situations. We expect the IRA to adhere to its responsibility to maintain the cease-fire. Obviously, any resumption of violence by the IRA would have a direct impact on the ongoing review.

US State Dept

Basically, after 20+ years of targeting innocent civilians in England (they never bombed Scotland or Wales) the US State dept only considered listing the IRA when the IRA started secret peace talks with the UK govt.

And what happened to the IRA? They are now in Govt, they too used proxy bombs (human bombs) if only for a short while and the final point is that the "real IRA" the hardcore that refused to join the peace accords was listed as an FTO in 2005.

State Govt 2005 list

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations

1. Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
2. Abu Sayyaf Group
3. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
4. Ansar al-Islam
5. Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
6. Asbat al-Ansar
7. Aum Shinrikyo
8. Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
9. Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA)
10. Continuity Irish Republican Army
11. Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group)
12. HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)
13. Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)
14. Hizballah (Party of God)
15. Islamic Jihad Group
16. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
17. Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Army of Mohammed)
18. Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI)
19. al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad)
20. Kahane Chai (Kach)
21. Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK)
22. Lashkar-e Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous)
23. Lashkar i Jhangvi
24. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
25. Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
26. Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM)
27. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
28. National Liberation Army (ELN)
29. Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
30. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
31. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
32. PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
33. Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network)
34. al-Qa’ida
35. al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (formerly GSPC)
36. Real IRA
37. Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
38. Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA)
39. Revolutionary Organization 17 November
40. Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
41. Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL)
42. United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)

And NORAID is still around in the US, still fundraising and still supporting the remnants of the IRA that did not join the peace agreement.
 
You know, we used to have a terrorist movement here in the UK (there have been lots actually) not so long ago - called the IRA. They carried out bombings to kill civilians - I will concede they sometimes phoned the police to warn them of where their bombs were so innocent civilians could be evacuated but often they didn't.

1973 - 10 car bombs left to kill innocent civilians. 2 were found but eventually 1 innocent killed and 180 injured.

1974 - bomb on a coach carrying soldiers AND their families, 11 dead.

1974 - first of the pub bombs (bombs placed in public bars) kills 2 soldiers, 3 civilians and injures 50.

1974, - second series of pub bombings, this time in Birmingham kills 21.

Series of small atacks continue in England but next major attack is 1984 - when the IRA tied to assassinate Margaret Thatcher and the UK Govt with the Brighton bombs.

1993 - Warrington, bomb kills two children

1993 - Warrington, bombs on gas meters (first of the economic target attacks)

1993 - IRA returns to bomb London, attacking the "city" financial district. Bishopsgate attacked

1996 - Canary Wharf, yet another civilian target bombed. 2 killed.

1997 - Arndale centre, Manchester bombed injuring 200 people.

I'm not even touching IRA bombings in Northern Ireland - far too many to count but you do also know the IRA received money, support and weapons from the US through NORAID, marches by known terrorists were held in America?

You obviously have a thing about Hamas, all I'm asking is that you recognise that your outrage against Hamas and their targeting civilians is only following what countless other terrorist organisations have done. I'm fairly certain if Hamas held marches in the US however or set up fundraising that your reaction would probably be quite different.

It's all, as was mentioned on page one - about perspective.


Please read post #147, Thankyou
 
Okay to all those that dont agree that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter...

what about

Luis Posada Carriles?

Here you have a man, convicted of blowing up an airplane, and yet protected by the US. Is he a freedom fighter because the plane was Cuban and he is a cuban exile or is he no better than a Hamas bomber that blows himself up in a disco?

Which is it?
 
Please read post #147, Thankyou

And yet you have no problem supporting their cause, and their fund raising in the US even to this day? Is that not a bit hypocritical? Or do you support the Palestinian movement to be free of Israeli oppression?
 
Okay to all those that dont agree that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter...

what about

Luis Posada Carriles?

Here you have a man, convicted of blowing up an airplane, and yet protected by the US. Is he a freedom fighter because the plane was Cuban and he is a cuban exile or is he no better than a Hamas bomber that blows himself up in a disco?

Which is it?

He denied involvement in the plane incident. He is also fighting against tyranny so he is a freedom fighter. Hamas is fighting to instill tyranny.
 
Our forefathers had ideals of freedom. Islam doesn't.

Do all Muslims practice exactly the same way?

Regardless, that is irrelevant if they want to be free from outside influence. Don't mistake this for supporting them.
 
Do all Muslims practice exactly the same way?

Regardless, that is irrelevant if they want to be free from outside influence. Don't mistake this for supporting them.

Islam is an oppressive culture.

What a lot of them may want they are not able to achieve because of fear. Intimidation and oppression is part of Islam.
 
Islam is an oppressive culture.

What a lot of them may want they are not able to achieve because of fear. Intimidation and oppression is part of Islam.

Islam is a religion.

Intimidation and oppression is a part of a lot of religions to varying degrees.
 
Back
Top Bottom