Who is a terrorist?

I find it easy to determine a terrorist. It is someone who targets and kills innocent civilians. Anyone who does that is a criminal, period.

The most identifiable consequence of total war in modern times has been the inclusion of civilians and civilian infrastructure as targets in destroying a country's ability to engage in war. The targeting of civilians developed from two distinct theories. The first theory was that if enough civilians were killed, factories could not function. The second theory was that if civilians were killed, the country would be so demoralized that it would have no ability to wage further war.

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

.
I find it easy to determine a terrorist. It is someone who targets and kills innocent civilians. Anyone who does that is a criminal,

..........................
Like what is happening now in Lebanon.. as Israel kills civilians ,destroy their houses &the country's infrastructure..may be Hizbollah isn't right ,but why civilians have to pay the price from their souls ,children and country?..

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

What an ignorant remark.

Tell it to Ronald Reagen, Oliver North, and the Contras you silly person.

detano inipo wrote:

.
I find it easy to determine a terrorist. It is someone who targets and kills innocent civilians. Anyone who does that is a criminal,

..........................
Like what is happening now in Lebanon.. as Israel kills civilians ,destroy their houses &the country's infrastructure..may be Hizbollah isn't right ,but why civilians have to pay the price from their souls ,children and country?..

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

What an ignorant remark.

Tell it to Ronald Reagen, Oliver North, and the Contras you silly person.

A pity you can't restrain yourself from insulting people who disagree with you. Why on Earth would I want to give this definition to them?

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

What an ignorant remark.

Tell it to Ronald Reagen, Oliver North, and the Contras you silly person.

A pity you can't restrain yourself from insulting people who disagree with you. Why on Earth would I want to give this definition to them?

More's the pity you post such ignorant crap.

You wear your ignorance of history like some sort of contrarian badge of honor.

Here's two words for you to look up.

Marynoll Nuns.

And your heroes Reagan and North call their rapists and murderers "Freedom Fighters."

Now leave the adults alone and climb back on to the short bus you silly person.

Reagan wasn't a terrorist. He only funded terrorists.


Hmm.. interesting notion. It's OK to fund terrorists.

In 1982, under pressure from Congress, the U.S. State Department declared Contra activities terrorism. The Congressional intelligence committee confirmed reports of Contra atrocities such as rape, torture, summary executions, and indiscriminate killings.

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

What an ignorant remark.

Tell it to Ronald Reagen, Oliver North, and the Contras you silly person.

A pity you can't restrain yourself from insulting people who disagree with you. Why on Earth would I want to give this definition to them?

More's the pity you post such ignorant crap.

You wear your ignorance of history like some sort of contrarian badge of honor.

Here's two words for you to look up.

Marynoll Nuns.

And your heroes Reagan and North call their rapists and murderers "Freedom Fighters."

Now leave the adults alone and climb back on to the short bus you silly person.

A post of this types serves two purposes. First, it displays your inability to respond to my argument, and frankly your lack of maturity or self-control. It was, I'm sure, not the intention of the people who created this forum that posters shriek insults at anyone who takes an opposing view. Second, it serves as a forfeit by you, since you have failed to respond to my argument. In the world of debate, failing to address a challenge to your assertions simply means that your position has been defeated - no more, no less.

Nothing you have said has challenged my definition of a terrorist as someone who intentionally targets non-combatants. As for the three entities you list, I don't care how North or the Contras are characterized. I do believe that President Reagan was not a terrorist according to my definition. If you disagree, you need only mention one single case in which Mr. Reagan deliberately sought the death of non-combatants. Of course, you cannot. You lose.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

kuvasz wrote:

"Freedom Fighters" with bad public relations consultants.

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

What an ignorant remark.

Tell it to Ronald Reagen, Oliver North, and the Contras you silly person.

A pity you can't restrain yourself from insulting people who disagree with you. Why on Earth would I want to give this definition to them?

More's the pity you post such ignorant crap.

You wear your ignorance of history like some sort of contrarian badge of honor.

Here's two words for you to look up.

Marynoll Nuns.

And your heroes Reagan and North call their rapists and murderers "Freedom Fighters."

Now leave the adults alone and climb back on to the short bus you silly person.

A post of this types serves two purposes. First, it displays your inability to respond to my argument, and frankly your lack of maturity or self-control. It was, I'm sure, not the intention of the people who created this forum that posters shriek insults at anyone who takes an opposing view. Second, it serves as a forfeit by you, since you have failed to respond to my argument. In the world of debate, failing to address a challenge to your assertions simply means that your position has been defeated - no more, no less.

Nothing you have said has challenged my definition of a terrorist as someone who intentionally targets non-combatants. As for the three entities you list, I don't care how North or the Contras are characterized. I do believe that President Reagan was not a terrorist according to my definition. If you disagree, you need only mention one single case in which Mr. Reagan deliberately sought the death of non-combatants. Of course, you cannot. You lose.

Argument? I saw no argument from you. I saw a declarative statement viz.,

Quote:

This answer is especially false. No one who targets civilians on purpose, as the primary, intended victim can ever be a freedom fighter.

based upon historical illiteracy and called you on it.

Ronald Reagan, Oliver North, and the rest of those murdering bastards in the Reagan regime knew long afterwards such violence commenced that the money they continued to secretly funnel to the Contras was going into the pockets of death squads throughout Central America, but they continued to refer to them as "Freedom Fighters." on par with the likes of George Washington

Any right wing fuktard with internet access can check out Google and find out what happened to the Maryknoll nuns in Central America, who did it and who funded them, but not you?

Your head is in the sand as usual when you come up against an inconvenient truth that shatters your world view.

You hold positions that conform not to obejective reality, nor to known rational measurement. Thus when you post your wet farts masking as intelligent mouthings, you open your self to rightful ridicule.

You are so blinded with ideological bull$hit that you cannot even understand that to fund a terrorist and supply him with arms who then kills innocent men women and children is himself just as much a fukking rat bastard terrorist war criminal scum as the son-of-a bitch who pulled the trigger. That you fail to understand that chain of custody of moral responsibility makes you the subject of the scorn and reprobation of those of us who are normal human beings.

Since I can not literally, nor would I for moral reasons strangle you in your sleep for the sake of humanity, the best I can do is hold your insane posts up to the light of facts and reason and hope to shame you into changing your ways or shutting up.