well, according to what Bush calls a terrorist, they would be terrorists. Of course they are not called, but under today's qualifications to be a terrorist, they were.
And review your question please, America was not a colony, America was, is and will be a continent. This is the United States OF America, not America of the United States.
2006-07-26 05:25:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Minutemen were not a part of the Boston Tea Party which was an action on the part of politicized citizens protesting a tax on tea imported from England. Though it might technically be called a terrorist act, it was not directed against innocent people and no one was hurt.
The Minutemen were part of the armed insurrection. They and George Washington, et al. were considered traitors by the British government and would have been tried as such, if the colonies had lost the war.
2006-07-26 12:34:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Giraffe 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
What constitutes a terrorist group? A terrorist group's basic aim is to cause terror and confusion; do they always represent an oppressed group? Probably not. I wouldn't consider the Taliban an an oppressed group, but an oppressive group. Usually terrorist group will continue its actions for no apparent reason, the American colonies did exemplify some characteristics, but when the British surrendered the fighting ceased. Even if America were to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, that would not guarantee peace. The terrorists groups today are indiscriminate in their actions; they don't care who they hurt, just as long as somebody is hurt. No, I would not classify the American colonists as terroists. George Washington, a traitor, to who? The British? Perhaps from the British position, yes. But Washington left no doubt anybody's mind who he sided with, if that's the case the entire Continental Congress and Army were traitors.
2006-07-26 13:08:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by tigranvp2001 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Boston Tea Party, in which tea was thrown into Boston Harbour in rebellion over the fact that the colonies were being taxed on tea, but had no say in the government. Taxation without representation. It wasn't about killing people for no apparent reason. What was the purpose of hijacking planes and driving them into the Twin Towers? These terrorists didn't like America or what it stands for? I have yet to see any reasoning.
2006-07-26 12:32:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by tweetymay 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Minute men have not done anything illegal or violent to date. Boston tea party was not aimed at kiling innocent citizens at random like Hizbollah and Al Qauda are doing.
2006-07-26 12:28:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by dude 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
...this question points out a very important modern reasoning... dumping tea into the harbor is equivalent to kidnapping civilians, torturing them, and sometimes chopping off their heads.. From 1987 to 1999, acts of terrorism multiplied by 5O%.. What sort of world shall it be for our grandchildren?
...I believe (unknowingly) it is in the psyche` of the nations to strengthen dictators and genocidal regimes, (subconsciously reasoning that) the sooner they kill off the people the sooner we can work out world peace with them..
2006-07-26 12:46:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by myzz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋