Terrorist or freedom fighter, the same old story

I voted "Both". I am familiar with the Jewish Partisan Activities, and draw distinction in that while the attacks were Terrorist in nature, the were directed at Occupation Forces military and administrative personnel and infrastructure. Irgun did not blow up Department Stores, Restaurants, or Commuter Busses as a rule.



timber

Thanks timber

er but if everyone votes both....and everyone has so far....i don't think it gets us very far!

I voted both as I would vote about most Palestinians but timber's distinction is very relevant. The Palestinians are shooting themselves in the foot with their target choices. Attacking civilians and targets outside their territory is counterproductive to their own cause.

freedom fighting and terrorist activity aren't mutually exclusive. The cause doesn't necessarily justify the means but the means by themselves don't have to precluse the cause.

Well I voted that they were terrorists. The last line in the article is the clincher. The term 'Freedom Fighter' suggests a political objective, which could be summarised simply as 'freedom'.

As the Stern Gang left no political message, they must have been simply terrorists.

Timber, would you please feed that bloody bird, its getting on my nerves (!)

I agree with Craven: the Palestinians are shooting themselves in the foot. That's a good way to continue the military control by Israel. Not enough Arab countries are speaking out against the Palestinian terrorist activities against civilians, but seem to have unlimited criticism for Israel. c.i.

Timber

You really should do something, Steve seems to get nervous, indeed:

Freedom fighters don't intentionally kill the innocent.

They're dead none-the-less. c.i.

Depends on a point of view I guess. If people around you are tergeted and killed by a group of fighters that call themselves freedom fighters, and you are not aware you, or the persons that were attacked and killed, have anything to do with the cause these fighters are fighting against, you would label them 'terrorists'
If you are, however, in the shoes of people that feel oppression by another party, and feel this is unjust, and want it to end, you are liable to call yourselves freedom fighters. Even if you kill to achieve your goals.
Even if you kill civilians to achieve your goals (I'm not saying this is just behavior for any group of freedom fighters, mind you). An eye for an eye, right? If they oppress your citizens, you oppress or kill theirs...
Besides, any civilian working in a country pays taxes to it's government, funds it uses to fight the freedom fighters and oppress their country. If one kills enough, a state will cease to function eventually.

Still, most outsiders feel(justly as far as I'm concerned) that if they are attacking and killing innocents in order to fight for their freedom, you're wrong. For even if they manage to win their freedom in this way, does one think they will cease targeting innocents? They'll likely use the same brute force to oppress those in their own country who voice protests against them.