If George Washington was around today, would he be considered a freedom-fighter or a terrorist, bearing in mind contemporary use of the term "terrorist"?
2007-08-28 10:41:29 · 9 answers · asked by Paranormal I 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
General Washington fought against British troops, not against civilians. He does not fit the definition of terrorist.
2007-08-28 10:47:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
If he was around today, under the way we currently view terrorists, he would be one. However, we have something called a dichotomy of thought, as in we can separate 2 very like things and give them unique definitions. For example (to not play into party politics, I'm going to remain on an international level here), the idea that the UN's rule is law was something that the U.S. created to place a measure of control on other countries. Yet we ourselves violated that idea.
The same is true with George Washington. He used guerilla tactics, much like those currently used in Iraq and that were used in Vietnam, to subdue a foe who knew less about the terrain on which they were fighting. Yet even today he might be called a freedom fighter for that same dichotomy, because we want to epitomize the gallant American.
2007-08-28 10:51:07 · answer #2 · answered by whiteflame55 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
George Washington was a brave leader who risked his life and endured severe winter hardships to gain our freedoms that are being taken away from us bit by bit, each and every day. I am just curious, by asking a question like that, are you an Illegal, or did you play too much football without a helmet? Darryl S.
2016-05-20 03:15:18 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To the United States he was a freedom fighter. To the British he was a terrorist and a guerrilla fighter.
2007-08-28 10:46:17 · answer #4 · answered by Mathsorcerer 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If he was around today attacking the Brittish he would be considered crazy probably. But he was a General and I think he would have some trouble getting an army signed up for that nowadays.
2007-08-28 10:48:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Freedom fighter the father of a great nation!
2007-08-28 10:47:34 · answer #6 · answered by TRUE GRIT 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
even though he own slaves at his time he was concidered a liberal so i think he would still be one of us today and the con's would call him a terrorist. this accually an intresting question when i read the heading i thought it would be stupid but its not so you go!!!!
2007-08-28 10:48:59 · answer #7 · answered by patsfan 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Terrorist! he was an incompetent military commander, regularly beaten in the field by superior British officers, but excelled at terrorising civilian populations through means such as torture. he only won because the crown tried to apply a purely military solution to a political problem, leaving Washington and his fellow traitors to take control in the absence of regular troops, a bit like modern gangsters.
2017-04-14 09:47:33 · answer #8 · answered by Tom 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
freedom fighter. Terrorists target civilians for indiscriminate killing.
2007-08-28 10:46:25 · answer #9 · answered by I wanna talk to Samson 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋