One who they are weak are called terrorists. Like US is using their Media and making them terrorist but those terrorists have nothing to protect their cause, even if people are fighting in thier own country agianst invaders are called terrorists.
2006-06-09 00:35:55 · 16 answers · asked by bashar 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
This is an unusual question - I am not sure I understand your question, but if so, basically I think that what you are asking is, are the one's called terrorists, done so because of the way the media portrays them, rather than the cause they are fighting for.
If so, I would say no. Freedom fighters are normally labelled "rebels".
If they use tactics such as attacking civilians, mosques, churches community centres etc to try and make their point, ie scaring people into submitting to their will, or force people to act in a certain way, this makes them terrorists, ie the use of terror as a political means.
Their are two types of opponents to the USA in Iraq for example. The so-called "insurgents", who are rebels, who just want to remove the Allied forces from their country. And terrorists who are destroying mosques and killing civilians to ensure their religion is the most powerful one in the new Iraq, once the western powers have left.
2006-06-09 00:42:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think we're all over the board here. I'm reading that you see the "insurgents" as the protectors of their country and being called "terrorists" While the US is being a big bully, with big weapons and the media on their side. The US was responding to 9/11 which you have to admit was the act of a terrorist. Why we ended up in Iraq, I don't know. But it is what it is, now you have insurgents that act like little boy terrorists on a local level and yeah, I guess they're going to be classified as terrorists to the degree that when you use civilians as a body shield, not good. When you behead an American on TV um I'm going with the terrorist thing again. But I get what you're trying to say, that we are there on their turf and they're trying to protect it and we have all the big guns. I also understand that we'll never understand the religious and political chaos we've created.
2006-06-09 07:55:19 · answer #2 · answered by Sidoney 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The coalition went into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. We did that. Do you have a problem with wanting a tyrant like Saddam OUT of power? Was he your favorite anal orrifice?
The coalition wanted to help rebuild Iraq to make conditions there better than they were during Saddam's time. Do you have a problem with that?
The coalition did not and does not want to stay in Iraq. The only reason they have been there this long is there are a bunch of idiots who don't know how to do anything but make loud noises and cause chaos. They don't know how to work WITH anyone except other idiots. FACT:If the idiots would quit setting bombs off with the intention to kill civilians we'd be out of there. Iraq has a people approved Constitution and a ELECTED government. If they didn't need our help we wouldn't be there now.
They aren't heros, martyrs, or anything else to be respected. They are criminals. They call themselves Muslim but they don't follow Muhammed or the will of Allah.
2006-06-09 08:12:25 · answer #3 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creating terror to someone rates you as a terrorist. The people who designed and implemented 9/11 are terrorist. The people who daily blow up people or decapitate people are terrorist. To call them anything but terrorist would be a lie. So you think that blowing people up and removing their heads is a way to get the coalition out of Iraq? I think not. If the Iraq People would just help themselves and us , we could leave sooner.
2006-06-09 07:54:08 · answer #4 · answered by meathead 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If your country was occupied illegally by foreign powers and US soldiers would patrol the streets and use your relatives for target practice, you would be a resistance fighter or "terrorist" yourself.
The word is often used wrongly, and deliberatley wrong by those in power who see themselves above Law and Human Rights.
In my eyes the greatest terrorists of our time are Mr. Bush and his cronies in the US administration.
2006-06-09 07:40:25 · answer #5 · answered by Magic Gatherer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who is killing the Iraqis ? Who is killing the Afgans ? It is the people in those countries. These countries have been involved in tribal war fare for centuries. If you want terrorism to stop in your country then help the US soldiers find the terrorists.
2006-06-09 07:45:54 · answer #6 · answered by sonny_too_much 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
unfotunately sometimes violence is the only way to resolve conflict especially when your dealing with fanatics of any race, god has a lot to answer for my friend,
please remember this, when other crazy leaders were killing their very own people for fun the western world was slated for not putting a stop to it,
now with places like iraq they are slated for trying to put a stop to it,,
heads i win tails you lose type problem, there is no winners in any violent conflict only casualties that can inflame hatred but you can not stand back and let innocents be slaughtered in anyones name, peace to all , god is what you are,
2006-06-09 07:57:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You and I live in totally different worlds. Even if I explained my views on this topic to you, you either wouldn't believe me, or you would simply categorize me as a "warmonger" or some other derogatory term. Let's just say that we don't agree and let it go at that.
2006-06-09 07:46:36 · answer #8 · answered by fhornsr 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is it true that a religion that condones the murders of Jews and Christians is a religion of peace?
2006-06-09 15:49:37 · answer #9 · answered by Incorrectly Political 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible says men's heart is desperatly wicked. Every sinners are evil enough whatsoever he's stronge or no.
2006-06-09 07:40:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋