Who is a freedom fighter and who is a terrorist ?

Post Reply New Topic

As the saying goes ''One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter''. I seem to think that although groups like the IRA, the PLO, the Tamil Tigers, etc committed horrific acts of terror, they wanted their homelands given back to them from those occupying them. I understand that but I do not agree with the horrendous acts of violence and destruction. I don't really see groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS as freedom fighters, I see them just as terrorists, I don't know whose freedom they are fighting for. I think Bin Laden maybe was a freedom fighter when he was fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan but afterwards became an international terrorist bent on ridding the world of ''infidels'' to his ideology such as Westerners, and even other Muslims whom he saw as ''heretical''. The atrocious attacks of September 11th do not look to me like the actions of a freedom fighter.

This is what a Freedom Fighter looks like:

Who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter is usually a matter of perspective and politics.
Are they fighting for freedom? Whose freedom? Freedom from what or whom? What will they do once that freedom is secured?

How far are they willing to go in the fight for freedom? Only attacking military targets? Do they care about collateral damage? Do they care if civilians are killed? Do they actively target civilians?

How many atrocities does a freedom fighter have to commit before they are a terrorist? Are the two terms even mutually exclusive? Freedom fighting is a very messy business. Irregular warfare always is.

How does one decide if a movement is completely terrorist or otherwise? Can a movement have both freedom fighters and terrorists? Is it a unified, centralized movement? Or is it decentralized and made up of isolated cells--some of which could be far more extreme than others? Does a group fighting for a legitimate cause lose legitimacy when it goes too far?

It's not something most people want to acknowledge, but if you're unwilling to get your hands dirty, you're not going to drive out any invaders any time soon. They rarely share your scruples.

I imagine it depends on the ideology, and the methods used.

Pro-independence and self-determination groups who want better opportunities, political representation and living conditions would count as freedom fighters.

Groups such as ISIS and the various far-right groups that stormed the Capitol would be terrorists, because their aim is eradicating certain ethnic groups or ideologies.

According to the Beijing government the Dalai Lama is a "terrorist".

In my humble opinion Santa Clause is more violent than the Dalai Lama!

Well, he is famous for punching out some Arian heretic.

Arian with an I and not with a Y????

For a second I pictured the fat elf punching out a Nazi Brown shirt.

So...the real original St. Nicholas of late Roman Anatolia "punched out" a non trinitarian Christian just for espousing that belief? Didnt know that he was "famous" for doing that.

Since I occasionally go to Unitarian churches I ...prefer my scenario. Lol!

You can be both at the same time. During the American Revolution the freedom fighters committed many acts of terrorism against loyalists.