Quote:
Originally Posted by dragoon500ly
Its a cliche, but one man's terrorist is often another man's freedom fighter.
That being said, just what is the fine line in between the two?
IMO, a freedom fighter restricts their attacks to military or political targets, taking all reasonable precautions to prevent the death or injuries of innocents. These are, after all, the people that you are fighting to liberate. That being said, I do accept that accidents will happen, but if the freedom fighters make a reasonable effort to follow the above, then I can see giving them combatant status under the Geneva/Hague conventions.
IMO, a terrorist will go out of their way to target civilians, after all, they can't shoot back. Most terrorist organizations make little if any effort to engage military or even law enforcement, and most of that will take the form of bombings or dive bys of their homes. In which case, to paraphase General Sheridan, the only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.
|
The problem is the definitions don't work. If you look at the resistance movements in WW2, they commited barbaric warcrimes and the post-liberation treatment of suspected collabatarors (can never spell the damn word) was downright savage.
There is an uncomfortable truth that in a democracy, the civilian is a legitimate target. It is the civilian that, in the end, determines foreighn policy by voting in or out government officials. If you can subject the civilian to enough fear and terror (so the theory goes) they will vote in a government that will yield to the demands of the terrorists.
It's a flawed theory, I admit, but not without merits. Afterall it was public opinion that helped to end the Vietnam war.
Also we have this view that unless the other guy wears a uniform and meets us, honourably, on the field of battle then he is somehwo inferior and evil. Well Iraq proved what happens when a poorly equipped, badly trained army tries to face up against modern, western kit.
So the other guy plays smart, he goes underground. He plants bombs, snipes our troops and fights on his terms. He targets civilians that are seen to be supporting the allies or bombs indiscriminately to invoke fear and terror to ensure that civilians don't even think about supporting them.
The rules of war only work when both sides are on an equal footing and agree to follow them. In ALL conflicts, as soon as you start to lose ina fair fight the rules are the first thing that get thrown out of the window.