1
   

Insurgents, Terrorists or what????

 
 
rayban1
 
Reply Mon 16 May, 2005 05:36 pm
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,582 • Replies: 42
No top replies

 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2005 10:30 pm
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
Christopher Hitchens wrote:
In my ears, "insurgent" is a bit like "rebel" or even "revolutionary." There's nothing axiomatically pejorative about it, and some passages of history have made it a term of honor. At a minimum, though, it must mean "rising up." These fascists and hirelings are not rising up, they are stamping back down. It's time for respectable outlets to drop the word, to call things by their right names (Baathist or Bin Ladenist or jihadist would all do in this case), and to stop inventing mysteries where none exist.

How about calling them "Iraqi patriots?"
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2005 11:17 pm
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
joefromchicago wrote:
Christopher Hitchens wrote:
In my ears, "insurgent" is a bit like "rebel" or even "revolutionary." There's nothing axiomatically pejorative about it, and some passages of history have made it a term of honor. At a minimum, though, it must mean "rising up." These fascists and hirelings are not rising up, they are stamping back down. It's time for respectable outlets to drop the word, to call things by their right names (Baathist or Bin Ladenist or jihadist would all do in this case), and to stop inventing mysteries where none exist.

How about calling them "Iraqi patriots?"


I'll do that when they stop killing civilians. To attack the police and soldiers is far different then blowing up civilians.
0 Replies
 
tommrr
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2005 11:29 pm
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
joefromchicago wrote:
Christopher Hitchens wrote:
In my ears, "insurgent" is a bit like "rebel" or even "revolutionary." There's nothing axiomatically pejorative about it, and some passages of history have made it a term of honor. At a minimum, though, it must mean "rising up." These fascists and hirelings are not rising up, they are stamping back down. It's time for respectable outlets to drop the word, to call things by their right names (Baathist or Bin Ladenist or jihadist would all do in this case), and to stop inventing mysteries where none exist.

How about calling them "Iraqi patriots?"

Be more than glad to if they were all from Iraq
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2005 11:53 pm
Patriots who simply shoot people they are supposed to capture. Source
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 08:38 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
Baldimo wrote:
I'll do that when they stop killing civilians. To attack the police and soldiers is far different then blowing up civilians.

How does blowing up civilians make one less of a patriot?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 08:39 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
tommrr wrote:
Be more than glad to if they were all from Iraq

But you'd agree, then, that the Iraqis among the insurgents are Iraqi patriots, correct?
0 Replies
 
rayban1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 01:16 pm
Zargawi is Jordanian and his band of thugs appear to be from other countries.......mostly from Saudi land, Syria, and Kuwait seeking virgins after death. The most appropriate branding would be religious lunatics.

The Baathists are Sunni and they could lay claim to the term patriot with some legitimacy so yes.......you could call them patriots but I won't because their motives have to do with greed and power instead of any true patriotic fervor for their country and all it's citizens.

The point is that the term insurgent is completely false because there is no attempt on the part of any group to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi population as a true insurgent would try to do. The term insurgent is a construct of the liberal media in order to put some sort of favorable camouflage on the suicide bombings that are killing hundreds of Iraqi civilians every day.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 02:11 pm
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
joefromchicago wrote:
tommrr wrote:
Be more than glad to if they were all from Iraq

But you'd agree, then, that the Iraqis among the insurgents are Iraqi patriots, correct?


What are you using as your definition of "patriot"?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 03:26 pm
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
joefromchicago wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
I'll do that when they stop killing civilians. To attack the police and soldiers is far different then blowing up civilians.

How does blowing up civilians make one less of a patriot?


What point would it serve to blow up civilians other then to create terror.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 06:28 pm
rayban1 wrote:
Zargawi is Jordanian and his band of thugs appear to be from other countries.......mostly from Saudi land, Syria, and Kuwait seeking virgins after death. The most appropriate branding would be religious lunatics.

The Baathists are Sunni and they could lay claim to the term patriot with some legitimacy so yes.......you could call them patriots but I won't because their motives have to do with greed and power instead of any true patriotic fervor for their country and all it's citizens.

The point is that the term insurgent is completely false because there is no attempt on the part of any group to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi population as a true insurgent would try to do. The term insurgent is a construct of the liberal media in order to put some sort of favorable camouflage on the suicide bombings that are killing hundreds of Iraqi civilians every day.


It's a crying shame that there isn't one single right leaning journalist with the integrity to call them what they really are then eh?
Those libs must have a real lock on what goes into the papers, blogs, cable news channels, message boards etc to ensure the longevity of this title.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2005 06:38 pm
Meaning of INSURGENT
Pronunciation: in'surjunt

WordNet Dictionary

Definition: [n] a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment.

They seem to fit the bill as "insurgents", especially when they were simply regarded (and underestimated) as "resistence" in the early stages of the conflict.
They have clearly morphed into terrorists, by definition. Since they are not allied and categorically united with their fellow countrymen, it would seem a bit odd to label them patriots.
If a Sunni and a Shi'ite decide to blow one another up willingly, they are warring religious factions, IMO.

Meaning of TERRORIST
Pronunciation: 'terurist

WordNet Dictionary

Definition: [n] a radical who employs terror as a political weapon
[adj] characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity"

I do seem to recall a guy who employed fear as a political weapon...but his name escapes me at the moment.

Either way you cut it, blaming "the liberals" doesn't foster any useful debate.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 08:39 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
McGentrix wrote:
What are you using as your definition of "patriot"?

As I mentioned in the "I want the US to lose the war in Iraq" thread: "Given that the definitions of "patriot" offered in this thread seem to apply equally to the Iraqis who are opposing the US as to those Americans who support the war, I see no reason not to call them "patriots" as well." I am, therefore, willing to accept just about any definition of "patriot" that was offered in that thread. To save you the trouble of finding them all (I know how easily tired you are, McG), I'll just settle on the definition that I offered: someone who wants what is best for his/her country.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 08:40 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
Baldimo wrote:
What point would it serve to blow up civilians other then to create terror.

Are you saying that terrorists cannot be patriots?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 09:19 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
joefromchicago wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
What are you using as your definition of "patriot"?

As I mentioned in the "I want the US to lose the war in Iraq" thread: "Given that the definitions of "patriot" offered in this thread seem to apply equally to the Iraqis who are opposing the US as to those Americans who support the war, I see no reason not to call them "patriots" as well." I am, therefore, willing to accept just about any definition of "patriot" that was offered in that thread. To save you the trouble of finding them all (I know how easily tired you are, McG), I'll just settle on the definition that I offered: someone who wants what is best for his/her country.


If you are applying that definition to this situation, then NO, they can not be considered to be patriots.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 11:16 am
Re: Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
McGentrix wrote:
If you are applying that definition to this situation, then NO, they can not be considered to be patriots.

Please explain.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 11:31 am
What the insurgents are doing is in no way what is best for the country of Iraq. They are doing it is a grab for power and to usurp the will of the people (popular elections and all that) for who knows what nefarious purpose.

There truly are villians in this story and they are blowing up cars and killing innocent Iraqi's every day. Not patriotic. Not what is best for their country.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 11:43 am
By the criteria provided here, Sam Adams was a terrorist. He countenance and furthered the activities of the Sons of Liberty, which included the pillaging of houses of English customs officials, and the burning of those houses--in at least two cases, when people were still inside. In the most notorious case, the stamp collector for Massachusetts was physically assaulted, his house plundered and set on fire, and he was fired upon while escaping from the back of the house.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 11:48 am
That's great, but what does it have to do with the present conversation? Are you trying to compare the terrorist/insurgent in Iraq to those in America in the 1700's? To what end?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 May, 2005 11:52 am
Quote:

There truly are villians in this story and they are blowing up cars and killing innocent Iraqi's every day. Not patriotic. Not what is best for their country.


You have no way of knowing what is best for their country in the long run.

I'm sure you will say it isn't the best to kill people; well, the same applies to the innocents we've killed in this war. We don't know what is best any more than they do, but have the arrogance to presume that we do...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Insurgents, Terrorists or what????
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 10:55:09