is there any justification for terrosism?

Question

join in the discussion at http://www.studystorm.com/viewthread.php?id=4&forum=17

can we accept the consequences of a free and open society or do we need to oppress people to be safe?

is losing our freedoms and our democracy a fair price to pay to protect ourselves against terrorism or this a price to high and is it worth the risk?

what do you think?

give us your ideas and comments at http://www.studystorm.com/viewthread.php?id=4&forum=17

terrorism!

lol spellings!

Answer 1

That is a brilliant question. Thank you.

But it is also a hard question to answer, because there are two main camps that are involved when it comes to terrorism. The one that creates terror, and the other one that has to endure it. I could bring myself to have empathy for both sides, so let's have a look at the "victims" first.

Generally people do not want to be bothered. They want to live and go about their business. Terror hampers those desires. It kills, maims, distracts, hurts physically and emotionally. Victims of terror therefore deserve empathy. Their hatred against terror is understandable and verifiable.

When looking at the terrorists we must come to the conclusion that sheer by the word a bad concoction is implied. Terror and the executors of terror inflict the pains i referred to above. In order to muster empathy for the terrorists one insurmountable question arises about the WHY of terror. What lead those people to inflict terror on others, because i deeply believe that even terrorists are people who do not want to be bothered and enjoy living as well as they want to go about their business. There must have been events in their lives or in the history of relatives or in the histor of their country that lead them onto the path of terror. Terror is a tool to be heard, so there must be a need for those people to voice their dissent and anger.

Terror can only be battled at the root. When there is no basis for terror, then there is no effect of terror. Throwing bombs and more bombs and then some will not do the trick. Being good people will do the trick. Winning the hearts and minds of people will dry out terror. We in the U.S. have never been good neighbors. Throughout our history we have plundered by force and by influence the natural resources of other countries the world over. We have implemented procedures and institutions (such as the World Bank and the IMF) to control other countries by debt and economical dependency on us. Since a few years we are tasting the sting of terror and although i reject violence and be able to have all the empathy in the world for the victims of terror, the deeper question, and the one that has to be answered before a solution can be found is:

Who was the initial victim?

Answer 2

We need to lose some freedom for protection; however, we should accept that gov'ts will never catch all terrorists. Accepting will allow the majority of us to maintain our freedom, those who suffer from attacks will pay the price. The only difference in the fighting is that the patriot volunteers do not do the dying for the rest of society, society also pays the price. Justification yes, never good enough though.

Answer 3

Depends on how you define terrorism. During the American Revolution, Americans were accused of terrorism because they didn't fight in straight lines on a clear field (but rather from behind trees) and they aimed for officers (considered barbaric at the time to aim for officers). America was too small to fight a "fair" fight, so they fought with what could be considered terrorism, which is the only way a small group can fight a big group in war.

I believe war is wrong so defending any way of fighting war is morally wrong. But assuming war is inevitable, sometimes terror is a "legitimate" way of fighting a bigger power. But if you go with this idea, you should be fighting for something meaningful, and in this case the terrorists America is fighting against are only fighting for their own power and the ability to oppress others. So in this case, terror is not acceptable to my standards in any way.

Answer 4

Easy answer no - more complicated answer - look at Palestine and the illegal occupation of their territories. They have no structured army to respond to intense onslaught so they fight a guerilla war with "terrorism". It's not pretty - any conflict isn't - but that's the only way they could respond.

Terrorism as an ideology - Al Queda et al - for the purposes of religious means is terrible, but then look closer to home when we embarked on the Crusades..religious terrorism.

Answer 5

Did terrorism bring about the collapse of the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Mr Mandella was convicted of planting bombs. That is terrorism, however he is now the leader of the country!

I don't think the answer is one as easy as yes or no.....there are reasons and grounds for the oppressed to take arms, as I'm sure many here would if they had to.

Answer 6

Yes it can be justified. If your peoples are oppressed and the oppressor has a vastly superior armoury at its disposal, what alternative is there?
If you oppress anyone at all, then by definition it is not an open society.
Loss of freedom and democracy is not only too high a price, it is also very risky.

Answer 7

Individuals never need oppression. And there is never a valid justification for a govt to force people to lose their freedoms.

Terrorism is used by individuals to attack a govt when they are powerless to do so using the laws, and terrorism is used by govts to control individuals, when the govt can't get what it wants legally.

So, yes, what is sometimes called terrorism can be justified -- when the people are fighting to free themselves from a tyranny or their own oppressive govt, and armed rebellion is the only option left to them.

Answer 8

What is the definition of Terrorism, does it include fighting against occupation, oppression & picking up arms against a Nation hell bent on giving a doze of their kind of decomaracy, forcing it down peoples throats to make them like themselves?

Answer 9

The writer HG Wells once said.....
"The first man to rasie his hands is the first one to run out of ideas" There is never any justification for terrorism as a means to change an issue.

Answer 10

no there is not Coming from a country that suffered 25 years of it here in Ireland nothing was gained by it. no one wins there is only loss on both sides. They say when we are desprit and all else fails the last thing we have to lose is Hope. A people with no hope left, are capable of anything and will turn to anyone that says they can save them. .