Terrorist or Freedom Fighter?

quote:

---

the legacy of this terrorist, murderer, pederast, thief of billions of dollars from his poverty-stricken peoples - is that he was a terrorist, murderer, pederast, thief and other things that will take time to come to light. But I should think this to be enough.
He is no different from others who espouse his methods and should be dealt with before they become 'glamorous'.

---

I agree that YA legacy of stockpiling money meant to fund the palestinian cause is a travesty (and a sham, and a mockery, a travershamockery). However, what other methods besides terrorism do the Palenstinians have? At one time the Palenstinians called all of current Israel "home". Then, in concentration camp manner, they were marginalized and told they could no longer go back to their homes. Then, what little land they had left was being settled by Israeli's during a time of peace. If this happened in America to Americans, would we be called "freedom fighters" or "terrorists" when we tried to get some of our land back?Palestine has no standing army, they have no defense budget, they are on constant curfew and bombings . . . what other option besides terrorism do they have? Don't forget that the current mess was started by the Israels. Ariel Sharon's nickname from way back is "Bulldozer". He got this nickname because he went through and bulldozed Palenstinian settlements to make way for Israeli settlements in the Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, and the West Bank. It's a mess that will not be solved by either the Israelis or the PLO. It is going to take outside arbitration and an agreement to stick to the rules that the arbiter lays out. I see no other way to prevent violence in that region.

quote:

---

q. what's the difference between terrorism and war?
a. a legitimate national army.

​

(what does this say about our own revolutionary war?)

---

Exactly. The "War on Terror" that America is focused on (or should be focused on) involves fanatical fundamentalism muslims. These types of terrorists are fighting for an ideology, not the return of land that they once owned or protection of lands they already hold.When looking at the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, it becomes apparent that it is a conflict between two nations, not ideologies. Another example of terrorism that Americans actually romanticize was committed by the IRA (Irish Republican Army). Their actions, in the absence of a recognized national army, are the very definition of terrorism yet these same terrorists are portrayed as heroes in American films. The IRA was working towards removing British rule from Ireland. The conflict between Protestantism and Catholicism in this struggle is really secondary. If the IRA was still bombing British targets would the "War on Terror" include launching cruise missles at IRA strongholds? Of course not. Why? Because Americans, whether they know it or not, support terrorism if they support the cause.As you mentioned, our very country was founded by what would be termed "terrorists" today. If a bunch of Muslims dressed up and dumped a huge amount of oil into Boston Harbor, what would happen to them? They would be sent to GitMo. What happened to the terrorists who dumped tea into Boston Harbor in the 18th century? They have been adored as heroes ever since.Us, as Americans, need to realize that terrorism is not always an evil thing. At times, it is the only device left to nations who are fighting for their very existence or for their freedom. Some complain that terrorism unfairly targets civilians instead of engaging the military. However, given over 100,000 deaths in the US led coalition's efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, I can hardly see how this complaint means anything.

quote:

---

Perhaps now that he is dead, more moderate minds and hearts will emerge to lead the Palestinian people towards their goal, a true Palestinian state in which the people and their leaders join the world community of nations, determined to approach problems in a manner that is conducive to and in line with the behaviour that is to be expected from civilized peoples.

---

Without the threat of violence, do you actually think this will happen? For comparison, do you think that America would still be separate from England without the Revolutionary War, or any violence whatsoever? My very humble opinion is that without terrorism or violence in Israel/Palestine we would not even be discussing a Palenstinian state.

quote:

---

You have a legitimate point but I do not recall any accounts of the American Patriots attacking English civilians in an attempt to terrorize the civilian population of England or of having a desire to drive the English people into the sea, something Arabs have repeated as their goal over and over again.

---

There was, and is, a pretty big pond separating american and british civilians. In this regard the American Rev. and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are nothing alike. So perhaps it isn't the greatest comparison.

quote:

---

I do not think of the men who fought in the revolutionary war as being terrorists even though many redcoats may have felt the terror of war.

---

The first rumblings of revolution involved terrorism, such as the Boston Tea Party. What I find interesting is that we (ie americans) use the word terrorist very freely. Who bombed the USS Cole? Terrorists, even though it was a military target. Who is fighting our troops in Fallujah? Terrorists, even though they are engaging our military. American Patriots also fought military forces and for that reason you label them combatants. Shouldn't the same label (combatant, not patriot) be applied to Al-Queda militants to attack US forces?

quote:

---

The main difference between the Palestinian terrorists and the Israeli military is that Israel is not targeting civilians specifically in order to acheive their goal of peace.

---

Israel doesn't have to target civilian targets, they have all the tanks, helicopters, planes, APC's, missles, etc. What do you do when all you have is enough explosive to make a car bomb? You make a car bomb. If Palestine had a strong military it would be a different matter, but when your main source of ammon is rocks from a rubble pile you can never call it a fair fight. Civilians are targeted because they are the only one's they can target with any effectiveness.

quote:

---

Arafat's aim was the total destruction of Israel, and that simply will never happen again.

---

And Sharon's goal is the total expulsion of Palestinians from the Occupied Territories, and that will simply not happen. At least we don't see Palestinian settlements appearing on Israeli land through military force. Last I heard, Palenstinian troops weren't harassing Israeli's trying to cross checkpoints on their way to work or to visit family members. The Palenstinians are the one's getting the short end of the stick, not the Israeli's.

quote:

---

As a Jew I feel quite qualified in saying, "Never Again"! If Palestinians truly want peace, they should follow the lead of other Arab nations that have made peace with Israel. Nothing short of that will help them in their cause.

---

Would you, as a Jew, support the removal of all jewish settlements in Palestinian settlements and a Palestinian state in the name of Peace? Would you support reparations for Palestinians that lost businesses and land when Israel was established?