• 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
Degreez said:
You didn't seem to mention "radical Islam" in any of your posts, instead just using basic generalizations:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057916644-post182.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057916678-post187.html

Here comes the trolling label. I noticed that when he got smacked in the face with his use of the term Islamic facism.
Click to expand...

Hmm I see, so when I said...
Jerry said:
If Al-Qaida or Hamas were fighting for freedom I might agree with the statement.
Click to expand...

...you thought I was refering to the avarage muslim.

Well that's your fault not mine.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Well when I said you, I really meant the collective you. I have no qualms with you Jerry, you just so happen to be the one I was referring to.
Click to expand...

That's a lame and typical cop-out.

When you quote me "you" in your post refers to me individually.

Arch Enemy said:
My point, which was in my post as well, is that in the eyes of every fighter they are fighting freedom from or for or to something. Whether it's the political sovereignty our fore-fathers fought for, the freedom of the restrictions of Earth which religious extremists fight for. But overly, the main thing people fight for is the freedom to choose. The freedom to choose whether they want a theocracy, or a democracy.
Click to expand...

They are NOT fighting for freedom, don't you get it?

They are fighting for WW3.
 
Jerry said:
I think those Muslims that are fighting the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan would read the part where I'm speaking about Al-Qaida, Hamas and "radical Islam".

You're another troll to add to the collection.
Click to expand...

You "Islam does not fight for anyone's freedom." not "radical Islam does not fight for anyones freedom" Its reasonable enough to assume you belive the two are interchangable if you fail to make the distinction.
 
Red_Dave said:
You "Islam does not fight for anyone's freedom." not "radical Islam does not fight for anyones freedom" Its reasonable enough to assume you belive the two are interchangable if you fail to make the distinction.
Click to expand...

I just said:
Jerry said:
They are NOT fighting for freedom, don't you get it?
Click to expand...

So according to you I must be speaking about every single person on the planet, right?
 
Jerry said:
That's a lame and typical cop-out.

When you quote me "you" in your post refers to me individually.
Click to expand...
Make up your mind. You call me a troll, and then you get upset whenever I try to rectify the situation. Dude seriously, you should change your signature to have a disclaimer that anyone who uses second person language will be considered a troll.

They are NOT fighting for freedom, don't you get it?

They are fighting for WW3.
Click to expand...

1) WW3 hahahahahahahahaha. Nostradamus is way more persuasive with his Quatrains than you are. What makes you think A) there is not a world war under way and B) that if there was to be a world war that there would be declarations of war?


2) Did you not read my post, at all? They are fighting for freedom to make the choice.
Please tell me again, how they are not fighting for any freedom whatsoever, that they are just mindlessly killing innocent civilians with no political motivation, and therein, if there was a political motivation it had no wish to cultivate into a power of control (the freedom to infuse one's will on others).
 
This is a dumb thread.


About as intellectuall stimulating as:

"a hen in hand is worth 2 in teh bush"

agree or disagree



Some Islamic (yes) fascist is not interested in any kind of freedom.

What sort of "freedom" did the taliban bring Afghanistan?
 
Goobieman said:
Fail. You're arguing apples and oranges.
You know this, of course.

Unless, of course, you're arguing that Hamas/Hezbollah/AQ are fighting to set up a country akin to ours, where people are free to do what they want as they want, so long as they do not impose upon others, and are protected from arbitrary acts by their government.

Tell me:
How does fighting for the power to impose an oppresive theocracy equate to fighting for freedom?
Click to expand...

It always amuses me when Eurotrash and Liberals try to compare our founding forefathers to scum who blow themselves up to murder innocent civilians,behead innocent people and try to impose a harsh oppressive theocracy.
 
jamesrage said:
It always amuses me when Eurotrash and Liberals try to compare our founding forefathers to scum who blow themselves up to murder innocent civilians,behead innocent people and try to impose a harsh oppressive theocracy.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is sadly amusing.
 
I can see what you are saying. It depends on where you are, what you believe and politics.

During the Bush administration, I sort of considered myself a freedom fighter.

Bush and his cronies were so busy trying harm the USA and get his rich buddies richer. We still have our pointless endless war against the Iraqi people.:doh
 
dragonslayer said:
I can see what you are saying. It depends on where you are, what you believe and politics.

During the Bush administration, I sort of considered myself a freedom fighter.

Bush and his cronies were so busy trying harm the USA and get his rich buddies richer. We still have our pointless endless war against the Iraqi people.:doh
Click to expand...



Well it's a good thing Obama came along and ended the Iraq war. Oh wait. :roll:
 
walleye said:
It depends on the cause of what you are fighting for. I know some people who try to compare terrorists to Americans in the Revolutionary war and I think that is absurd. Americans were fighting for freedom from tyranny. Muslim fascists are fighting to establish a theocracy of enslavement. That is not a "freedom fighter" in my opinion. I think it all comes down to the cause of your fight.
Click to expand...
This -should- be obvious to everyone.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
They are seen as a resistance movement to their people, seen as terrorists by those opposed to them.
Click to expand...
Yes... but... are they actually fighting for freedom?
For whom? Defined how?
 
EgoffTib said:
It does make sense. Now explain that to Goobieman, he seems to be having trouble understanding. :cool:
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying in its entirety, and its pretty stupid of you to assume I do not.

What YOU seem to have trouble with is that to be a "freedom fighter" you have to be fighting for actual freedom.
 
Goobieman said:
Yes... but... are they actually fighting for freedom?
For whom? Defined how?
Click to expand...

No, I spotted the verbal trap in your question which is why I quoted the BBC text rather than try to explain "whose" freedom they are supposedly fighting for.

The only real answer is one given by PeteEU ages ago and repeated again - it is a question of perspective. Hamas self proclaim as "resistance" - not "freedom." The label "freedom fighter" is not part of their vocabulary.
 
SgtRock said:
You missread my statemnt. I said in refering to the IRA "I had sympathy for the IRA's cause of freedom.
Click to expand...

Do you think the IRA only targeted civilians in the Northern Ireland troubles? That there were no civilians targeted in the campaign for Southern Irish independence?


SgtRock said:
The IRA were terrorist. There goal was not the destruction of Britain and the death of all Brits. There goal was freedom for Ireland.
Click to expand...

They tried to achieve their goal through means that are considered terrorism. i.e. to instill fear and make a place ungovernable whether through terrorising ordinary civilians or killing members of the govt. Driving the English out or into the sea was just as much an IRA goal as Hamas driving the Israelis out.

SgtRock said:
Hamas stated goal is the destruction of Israel and to drive all Israelis into the sea. They use terrorist tactics to achieve this goal. They will not settle for two nation states. Hamas uses tactics with the intent to kill civilians. They are a terrorist organization just as the IRA was a terrorist organization.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
No, I spotted the verbal trap in your question...
Click to expand...
Therer's no verbal trap in my question.
Its completely straightforwrd, and very simple.
The answer is as well.


The only real answer is one given by PeteEU ages ago and repeated again - it is a question of perspective. Hamas self proclaim as "resistance" - not "freedom." The label "freedom fighter" is not part of their vocabulary.
Click to expand...
So you would agree that Hamas, Hizboolah, and AQ are -not- actually freedom fighters, since they do not actually fight for freedom.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Do you think the IRA only targeted civilians in the Northern Ireland troubles? That there were no civilians targeted in the campaign for Southern Irish independence?
Click to expand...

I know the black and tans targetted civilians and engaged in other terror tactics during the 1920's.

As far as the fromation of the pIRA goes, this was brought on by protestant paramilitary groups such as the UVF who engaged in terrorism and ended up in positions of authority in such groups as theUDR and RUC.



Although, one thing must be noted above and beyond anything else. Unlike the Protestant paramilitary groups, the pIRA has apologized for all civilian casualties.


They tried to achieve their goal through means that are considered terrorism. i.e. to instill fear and make a place ungovernable whether through terrorising ordinary civilians or killing members of the govt. Driving the English out or into the sea was just as much an IRA goal as Hamas driving the Israelis out.
Click to expand...

Killing members of the government, especially terrorist elements within the government (i.e. the RUC & UDF), in a fight for freedom is not terrorism.

The only valid metric for terrorism is targetting civilians, and that alone should be the metric.

There is no doubt that some members of the pIRA most definitely engaged in terrorism, but it was not a universal tactic employed by every member of the pIRA.

But it must also be stated that the pIRA was not the only terrorist group in Northern Ireland, and as far as the ratio of dead civilians to combatants goes, they were far from the worst terrorist group in Northern Ireland.
 
SgtRock said:
You missread my statemnt. I said in refering to the IRA "I had sympathy for the IRA's cause of freedom. But there tactic of purposefully targeting civilians was unacceptable. They were terrorist."

The IRA were terrorist. There goal was not the destruction of Britain and the death of all Brits. There goal was freedom for Ireland.

Hamas stated goal is the destruction of Israel and to drive all Israelis into the sea. They use terrorist tactics to achieve this goal. They will not settle for two nation states. Hamas uses tactics with the intent to kill civilians. They are a terrorist organization just as the IRA was a terrorist organization.
Click to expand...

The IRA blew up cars, murdered people, and hell even blew up whole streets basicly, and you call them terrorists, but yet are sympathetic for their cause of freedom from the UK... gotcha

So let me ask you.. condemn Hamas and the way it goes about doing things, but do you support the right of the Palestinian people to live in a country of their own in the areas known as the occupied territories or not?

But regardless of you answer, you can not deny that in the eyes of the oppressed peoples in the occupied areas, Hamas or anyone fighting back will be seen as a freedom fighter, and those that occupy the area will see them as terrorists.. yes or no?

As for goals in revolutionary charters or documents... so you are saying because Hamas has been interpreted by westerners to want to get rid of Israel in a document written under occupation and war (and a document with a highly religious theme at that), then this organisation is "damned" forever? Does this apply for everyone or just muslims? Because if I remember right, the US revolutionary documents promoted slavery and denied rights to women..
 
Last edited:
freedom fighters using terrorist tactics
the last part kind of moots the previous part
 
PeteEU said:
But regardless of you answer, you can not deny that in the eyes of the oppressed peoples in the occupied areas, Hamas or anyone fighting back will be seen as a freedom fighter, and those that occupy the area will see them as terrorists.. yes or no?
Click to expand...
Being seen by someone as a 'freedom fighter' and actually fighting for freedom are not in way necessarily the same thing.

Fightng for the power to create an oppressive theocracy isn't fighting for freedom.
 
Tucker Case;1057917495 There is no doubt that some members of the pIRA most definitely engaged in terrorism said:
So your claiming some member of the P.I.R.A acted independantly? I think thats highly unlikely given how the P.I.R.A enforced such a ridgid system of discipline over there members [Not to mention the catholic community as a whole]. Though i except that they had *very* legitimate grevences ild dispute that the P.I.R.A were fighting for freedom when they were fighting against what the vast majority of people in NI wanted. The whole reason Northern Ireland was created in the first place was that most of those living there didnt want to be part of Eire. How was fighting against their wishes fighting for freedom?
Click to expand...
 
Goobieman said:
I understand what you're saying in its entirety, and its pretty stupid of you to assume I do not.

What YOU seem to have trouble with is that to be a "freedom fighter" you have to be fighting for actual freedom.
Click to expand...
Again, freedom is different for each group of people. It is all subjective. The sooner you realize this the better.
 
DeeJayH said:
freedom fighters using terrorist tactics
the last part kind of moots the previous part
Click to expand...
How do you figure? You can surely kill innocent people of the opposing faction while still fighting for the freedom of your own people.
 
EgoffTib said:
How do you figure? You can surely kill innocent people of the opposing faction while still fighting for the freedom of your own people.
Click to expand...

Hamas, Al-Qaida and radical Islam are not fighting for the freedom of their people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom