Such as the Minutemen. Rather than fight formal battles in the traditional dense lines and columns, they were better when used as irregulars, primarily as skirmishers and sharpshooters.
2006-07-02 16:29:15 · 4 answers · asked by Rick 7 in Education & Reference ➔ Other - Education
Maybe not just minutemen. Locals etc.
2006-07-02 16:35:15 · update #1
They were guerilla fighters there is a difference. Terrorism is when you target civilians with the intent of killing civilians and none combatants. A soldier fights and takes up arms knowing full well he can be killed and is fighting for a cause. Killing unarmed civilians turns war into an uglier proposition than it already is.Guerilla tactics are not acts of terrorism. The roadside bombs are fair game the world trade center was not it was a crime.
2006-07-02 16:36:56 · answer #1 · answered by thomas p 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Terrorists, no there were not. Though I suppose a lot depends on your definition of terrorist.
Yes you are correct in that, the American's needed to fight differently then the standard European format (stand up and get shot, till one side gives up). They took cover, they did raids, all that.
What they DIDN'T do, is target civilians, and civilian structures. They were much like what you would call a guerilla force, not a terrorist force.
2006-07-02 23:35:41 · answer #2 · answered by tm_tech32 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Minutemen didn't murder civilians. There's a difference between guerrillas and terrorists.
2006-07-02 23:33:36 · answer #3 · answered by zmm 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there were. for more info read "last of the mohicans" its not about the revolution but it gives you the idea of the mind set during the times.
2006-07-02 23:33:39 · answer #4 · answered by santosh s 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋