Sure fighting with IEDs and fighting in civilian clothing is dirty, but what's terrorist about attacking a foreign military that is in your country? I mean do we seriously not expect them to fight back? I don't agree with their ideals, but don't they have a right to attack us back? Would we still call it terrorism if they fought us directly instead of hiding?
2006-07-29 06:12:58 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
In a conflict it is legitimate for an insurgency to attack military targets. The cowardice of the insurgency of Iraq is in their wearing civilian clothes, hiding in civilian neighborhoods, even fighting from within homes full of civilians.
The people that know the insurgents are within their midst bear SOME responsibility for not alerting the legitimate government of their country to the whereabouts of the insurgents. Civilians must flee from combatants and combatants must not HIDE behind civilians. Either group not observing the Law of Land Warfare is responsible for the ensuing civilians deaths.
2006-07-29 06:21:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anthony M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The definition of terrorism is harming innocents to create terror in the populace, which you then manipulate to get your way.. If the al-Qaeda insurgents just attacked military targets, they would not be terrorists. They would be insurgents. However, they do attack civilians, so they are terrorists. Therefore, the answer to your question is yes, military targets are legitimate targets for the insurgency, but civilians are not, and that makes them terrorists.
2006-07-29 06:21:22 · answer #2 · answered by FiatJusticia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, military targets are legitimate targets. That is all that we are allowed to engage. The "terrorists" do not share that distinction. We have to positively identify that they are actually engaging us, but by that time it is too late. They do not follow the Law of Land Warfare, whereas we do. So if in protecting ourselves or any of the coalition forces we kill a civilian, CNN or MSNBC will be all over it and make the soldiers look like murderers. They can torture and kill enemy prisoners of war on tape, but we must bow to all their wishes. Abu Ghraib, yes, the pictures were touchy, but its a far cry from beheading a civilian on tape and showing it to the world. So yes, i know why they fight back, but they are cowards, no question about it. They are terrorists, period!
2006-07-29 06:35:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes they are. However the enemy in Iraq is attacking civilians.
If they stopped attacking civilians and if they stopped hiding behind civilians then they would no longer be terrorists.
2006-07-29 08:28:40 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you. The question is whose ox is being gored? I don't approve of their actions, but I do understand them. Although, many of the fighters have come from Syria. If America was attacked, I would hope Mexicans and Canadians would come into our country to help us defend it.
2006-07-29 06:19:32 · answer #5 · answered by Steve R 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One man' terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. PS: Who started all this??? Time to reread your history books, youngun'.
2006-07-29 06:18:22 · answer #6 · answered by Sean T 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋