because if they were fighting the Russians or any country that is not a friendly or allied to America, certainly the would be called Freedom Fighters.
2007-01-03 21:18:51 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
The only difference between being a "terrorist" or a "patriot" is who wins the war.
George Washington, by the standards of his day, was a textbook example of a "terrorist". He used guerilla hit and run tactics instead of fighting out in the open "like a man", he employed spies, which was considered cowardly, and his troops routinely attacked their fellow colonists who wanted to remain loyal to the King (loyalists accounted for at least half of the population at the time).
What saved Washington's reputation is the fact that his side won.
As for the gentleman who mentioned blowing up a wedding, I believe the US has killed its share of wedding guests in the past couple of years.
I also seem to recall a Lebanese family that was wiped out by a "defective" israeli tank shell a few weeks ago, and before them another family that was blown to bits by a "defective" israeli artillery round while they sat on a beach.
It would seem that there are plenty of bloody hands on all sides of the conflict.
2007-01-03 23:59:33 · answer #1 · answered by normanbormann 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
These terms refer to [Terrorist/Insurgent] refer to the use of guerrilla tactics against their own elected government and civilians in general. These groups typically want to improve their own lot not necessarily others of their countrymen.
A Freedom Fighter, Liberator, Patriot are terms for people who love their country and are trying to remove oppressors [either real or imagined]
.
2007-01-03 21:46:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The difference is the men who are going into Iraq to fight the U.S. troops do not want to live in a world of peace and harmony.
The Al Quada members who attacked the United States do not want to live in peace and harmony.
Radical Islamic Extremists do not want to co-exist. They want to be the only religion on the planet! They want to exterminate every religion that isn't theirs.
They are not fighting for everyone else's freedom...just their own.
Whereas the United States of America is made up of co-existance. Every religion of every country is within our borders.
Can't you see that whether you agree or disagree with the reasons that were used to go to war... Saddam Hussein was a brutal tyrant who committed human rights violations and needed to be removed from power.
Just because he didn't committ terrorism against the U.S. directly doesn't mean he wasn't a terrorist. He was a terrorist to his own citizens!!
2007-01-03 21:43:59 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
That is because a Freedom Fighter, Liberator, or Patriot won't cut your head off with a dull knife while chanting to God. He also won't run up into your favorite market place with an explosive belt on with the intent on going to meet 77 or however many virgins.
2007-01-04 01:11:08 · answer #4 · answered by B aka PE 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
These people are highly motivated and brain washed. They think themselves freedom fighter and their target is their opponents. Media is providing these people wide publicity which is oxygen for them. Revengeful and haters provide them with resources.
After 9/11 and end of Soviet Union world atmosphere has completely changed. In my view if these people adopt peaceful means to promote their cause, they will be more respected in United States and elsewhere. Life is precious. There is no chance of achieving political gains through unlawful activities.
2007-01-03 21:43:12 · answer #5 · answered by snashraf 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wrong, Bush's administration considers the Chechnyan fighters terrorists- I am referring to their reference on their "mutual fight against terrorism", where Russia participates in such a way as to oppress the Chechnyans.
You see, it is a new era of friendship between Russia and USA.
2007-01-03 21:26:45 · answer #6 · answered by dane 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It all comes down to perspective. In the Iraq War, they are insurgents/terrorists because they are slowing the US' plan for rebuilding and what not. But to the actual "insurgents", they are fighting for their own sovereignty minus US interference of course.
In the American Revolution, the British viewed the US militia as insurgents because they did not fight like a gentlemen (line in a row, duck, and reload), but rather in bushes and snap attacks.
I think you have the right understanding.
2007-01-03 21:24:10 · answer #7 · answered by Thomas G 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Are you talking about the illegals?
The tax money goes up every time it comes in.
They hurt the economy.
Some of them comes in to comit easier crime(comes in and do stuff, then rushes back into their country=hit and run).
The "majority" is not out in war or fighting anything.
Do you even know what's going on because of them?
By the way, what freedom? whos freedom?
Don't say civillians because that's who they aim for.
2007-01-04 01:29:14 · answer #8 · answered by cruel 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not if they took innocent civilians with them, intentionally. That has NEVER been a respected tradition.
2007-01-04 02:26:07 · answer #9 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ummm...
could it be because they deliberately target and kill women and children in hopes that the Americans get blamed for all the violence?
2007-01-04 01:36:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋