What is terrorism and how did it start.
Terrorism orgin:
Well the word "terrorism" is French and comes from the word "terrorisme" which means( to cause to tremble) the time that The French revolution got started.
Terrorism today:
Well today we define terrorism as some mad men blowing their self up or just blowing up people for a cause they believe so strongly in. For example some believe the U.S.A are trying to be the king of the world and controlling it. Then they believe, that this is such a huge issue, that they have to show the U.S.A is quite feeble. So they blow innocent people up to show their opinion. This is one form of terrorism.
But when are you a terrorist:
Like take a country that has a dictator which is running the country very unfairly, or a foreign military power, that has invaded the country for several reasons. Like the time when WW2 existed. A lot of people became freedom fighters to take the invading military power down. They were in the eyes of the invading power terrorists, rebels or saboteurs, when they attacked the force. But surely they were in the eyes of the people heroes. But I have been told as long a group of freedom figthers or saboteurs are attacking and killing "non-innocent" people, then they can not be called terrorists. This is simply impossible.
The situation in Afghanistan.
The time when this country was having its problems with the Soviet Union , and it trying to conquer this country, a lot of us know, that in some way it was a struggle between the U.S.A and The Soviet Union to show who was the headmaster of the world. The U.S.A condemned the fight, and said the Afghan Mujahideen" The fighting force for Afghanistan" were freedom fighters, and had every right to push the foreign force out of their country. Ofcource the U.S.A helped, because they were trying to make the Soviet Union look weak.
Now the U.S.A is in Afghanistan and President Bush says, that when they attack U.S forces, then they are automatically labeled as terrorists. But somehow this can not be true, because the U.S is not innocent.
They are a military force. The Afghans can be called rebels, but it is untrue to call them terrorists, if they are not attacking unarmed men and women.
Is it okay to be a freedom fighter or a terrorist?
Well is it. In my opinion a freedom fighter is more than okay if the power that controls the country is in anyway trying to harm the population. Well the U.S has stated, that they are in Iraq and Afghanistan to protect and help the people to a new start. So you can clearly say, that their statement is not in anyway directly hurting the country like the Nazi forces were doing. But when we come to a terrorist it really can not be okay to sacrifice the lives of innocent people for something you want to be fulfilled. It is barbaric and clearly very selfish. But okay in anyway if you are unsatisfied with your countries government, then try doing something about it the diplomatic way, but if the government is so cruel and evil and unfair, then freedom fighters and saboteurs should be okay, but only as a last resort.
There may be additions.
Terrorism orgin:
Well the word "terrorism" is French and comes from the word "terrorisme" which means( to cause to tremble) the time that The French revolution got started.
Terrorism today:
Well today we define terrorism as some mad men blowing their self up or just blowing up people for a cause they believe so strongly in. For example some believe the U.S.A are trying to be the king of the world and controlling it. Then they believe, that this is such a huge issue, that they have to show the U.S.A is quite feeble. So they blow innocent people up to show their opinion. This is one form of terrorism.
But when are you a terrorist:
Like take a country that has a dictator which is running the country very unfairly, or a foreign military power, that has invaded the country for several reasons. Like the time when WW2 existed. A lot of people became freedom fighters to take the invading military power down. They were in the eyes of the invading power terrorists, rebels or saboteurs, when they attacked the force. But surely they were in the eyes of the people heroes. But I have been told as long a group of freedom figthers or saboteurs are attacking and killing "non-innocent" people, then they can not be called terrorists. This is simply impossible.
The situation in Afghanistan.
The time when this country was having its problems with the Soviet Union , and it trying to conquer this country, a lot of us know, that in some way it was a struggle between the U.S.A and The Soviet Union to show who was the headmaster of the world. The U.S.A condemned the fight, and said the Afghan Mujahideen" The fighting force for Afghanistan" were freedom fighters, and had every right to push the foreign force out of their country. Ofcource the U.S.A helped, because they were trying to make the Soviet Union look weak.
Now the U.S.A is in Afghanistan and President Bush says, that when they attack U.S forces, then they are automatically labeled as terrorists. But somehow this can not be true, because the U.S is not innocent.
They are a military force. The Afghans can be called rebels, but it is untrue to call them terrorists, if they are not attacking unarmed men and women.
Is it okay to be a freedom fighter or a terrorist?
Well is it. In my opinion a freedom fighter is more than okay if the power that controls the country is in anyway trying to harm the population. Well the U.S has stated, that they are in Iraq and Afghanistan to protect and help the people to a new start. So you can clearly say, that their statement is not in anyway directly hurting the country like the Nazi forces were doing. But when we come to a terrorist it really can not be okay to sacrifice the lives of innocent people for something you want to be fulfilled. It is barbaric and clearly very selfish. But okay in anyway if you are unsatisfied with your countries government, then try doing something about it the diplomatic way, but if the government is so cruel and evil and unfair, then freedom fighters and saboteurs should be okay, but only as a last resort.
There may be additions.
Last edited by stef10 (2006-09-21 12:11:41)