Soldier and Terrorists, aren't these the same?

Question

When I mentionned that the word terrorist and soldiers are just matter of opinion most people are eager to mention that soldiers fight with honor unlike terrorist who are the scum of the earth killing innocent civilians...

What do you think any WW ll victims would say about this?
Would they say that German soldier had honor and weren't killing innocent? (choke)

And what would German soldiers have called french and british fighters? Soldiers or insurgent?

Soldiers and terrorists are terms define by propaganda only...

There is no honor in killing people...

Thelma: You never hear soldier bragging on about killing and abusing people? But of course you hear terrorist bragging about it? ... btw don't forget about Abou Graib and these horrible pictures...

Answer 1

one man's "soldier" is another man's "terrorist"

Answer 2

You are not asking any questions, really. Your participation is rather the expression of a biased opinion, badly phrased and without a basis. Read more books so you can truly have a clearer view of life. Soldiers exist on both sides of a conflict and are part of an organisation, created and maintained by a government. Resistance fighters, "terrorists", franc-tireurs or whatever, are persons outside the frame of an equal organisation such as that of the soldier. This in no way implies a judgement on their motives or actions.
Killing of innocents is a byproduct of any war or conflict and can be done by soldiers or irregular fighters alike. Some times it is accidental or incidental, sometimes it is done purposely. A street brawler fights others, a professional boxer also, but they are not the same.

Answer 3

No they are not the same. Not even close. A soldier wheather volenteer or conscript is serving in a reconginsed army and is upheld to standards. Often these are called rules of engagement. Rules of Engagment (ROE) are discussed by top military leaders/officials and the Secretary of Defense and are then placed onto an Army to ensure that it engages the enemy properly.

A few difference between the French Resistance in WWII then Iraqi insurgents in the War on Terrorism.
1. French Resistance targeted military targets in order restore their government in exile.
2. The French Resistance did not target innocent civilians in order to destablize the country
3. The French Resistance did kill french citizens in order to promote fear into the people.

While the German's could call the French Resistance an Insurgency, the two insurgencies are completly different. Also the Germans did call French and British soldiers that wore uniforms, soldiers. Since they took these individuals into POW camps, it proves they identfied these soldiers, sailors, marines and airman as 'soldiers' and not terrorists.

As far as lumping all Germany in with the war crimes, you need to understand there was a huge difference between the regular Germany Soldier and a German SS Solder.

Terrorists aim at forcing a political openion at you using terror. They threaten with violance in order restrict your actions and beliefs. Often, they do back up their actions with violance which often results in innocent people dieing for their cause.

While you are right, there is no honor in killing people. A soldier when asked to go to war, fully understands that he might die in his cause when engaging in battle with other soldiers. Its understood. What is sad, is the innocent people who perform their daily business on the streets of Baghdad that are blown up by suicide bombers trying to earn cool points in the name of religion.

Answer 4

I can see your point to a degree but, as so often happens on here, you are generalising - a lot. Soldiers, who are part of an organised Army and from a country who obey NATO or a similar organisation's rules have laws about the way they fight. They try not to break those laws and not harm innocent people. I know these laws get broken and innocent people get hurt and killed in wars but Terrorists have no laws or rules and will do anything and hurt or kill anyone to get what they want. The words we use for people are just words, it's the intentions of the people that count.

Answer 5

A soldier is a person who swore an oath to protect and defend his country. To wear the uniform of that country and if necessary fight in the name of that country. He follows the rules of warfare as laid down in the Geneva Convention. He follows the rules of engagement. He fights the enemy.

A terrorist creates terror by definition. He owes no allegiance to any government just the leader of his organization. His greatest weapon is fear. He forces the population of the country he is in to fear him, fear the so-called enemy, and to fear daily life. He serves no purpose. His only calling is the end of the country he fights in. He is a coward, who follows no rules of engagement or the Geneva Convention. In fact he is considered a mercenary.

There is and cannot be any comparison between a soldier and a terrorist.

Answer 6

Ok..right, let me educate you.
Firstly a they are both 'soldiers' in there own rights but one doesn't want to kill whilst the other must kill.
A soldier is trained to defend his/her nation against attack with minimal casualties.
A terrorist is 'trained' to attack a nation with maximum casualties.
The difference between the two is obvious and needs no more explanation.
IMO a terrorist is NOT a soldier, they are simply cowards.

Answer 7

if you want to believe that soldiers are in the same league as terrorists, then so be it...it just so happens that you are wrong. there absolutely IS honor in defending ones principles, values, culture, and country from any enemy that would do those harm. THAT is what soldiers do. yes, terrorists and soldiers both work to advance an ideology, but it is that ideology that defines and separates the two. if you do not, cannot, or will not see this, there is nothing to say to help you. good luck with your life...

Answer 8

well my husband believes people should be allowed to live, pray and think how they want and not be killed if they don't agree with him, as far as i can see terrorists are not that open minded, 9/11 ring a bell, my father is a NYC firefighter and he knows and has seen the difference between a soldier and a terrorist

Answer 9

you have no concept of the military machine that ensues your right to a peaceful life and stops you being blown out of your safe little civilian haven where you sit and think up these questions,i could talk about the rules of engagement that all military forces operate under but i don't think you would understand it,killing people is not about preserving honour,it never has been,its about preserving life yours included and as in most large organisations there are bound to be those who abuse their power.you are protected by a flag that good people have died defending in order to give you a quality of life that they themselves gave up,dont abuse them....

Answer 10

You could consider the perpetrators of Abu Ghraib terrorists (barely). Also, US soldiers that indiscriminately kill innocents? You could label them terrorists. However, what you can't do, is label our entire force terrorists. Many of them do fight with honor, do make efforts not to kill innocents, there's nothing more they can do given their task. Every 'soldier' fighting for the enemy is a terrorist. They specifically target innocent people with suicide bombs.

Answer 11

Ever wonder is living human kind the Son of God and the dead Mummy of the Son of a dirty old man from the graveyards of failures and horrors of the past were the same?
Luke 9.55-56
What do you think?