Is this terror?

Saigon

Gold Member
May 4, 2012
11,434
882
175
Helsinki, Finland
Following on from a few other threads where the subject of terror has arisen, I thought it might be interesting to consider whether any kind of terror attack can ever be acceptable.

To my way of thinking, no attack against civilian targets is ever acceptable for any reason.

I am also opposed to most attacks against government buildings, such as the 9/11 strike on the Pentagon, the King David Hotel bombing, etc, because I think most of the casualties often end up being civilians as well.

But what about resistance against oppression?

Here's one case I often think of - that of Max Manus...his attacks would fit most peoples definition of terror, but was he really evil?

Max Manus, a Norwegian resistance leader whose Oslo Gang sank so many German warships, blew up so many German planes and kept Norwegian spirits so high during the Nazi occupation in World War II that he became a national hero, died on Friday, The Associated Press reported. He was 81.

Once he and a countryman had parachuted safely into the countryside outside Oslo and been supplied with hundreds of pounds of explosives and other provisions in follow-up air drops, there was hardly a day that the Germans did not feel their sting.

Although his chief target was German shipping in the Oslo harbor, Mr. Manus, who sometimes spent days under stinking piers waiting for cargo ships to tie up and who claimed even a battleship among his prizes, blew up virtually any German military or industrial target he encountered, including more than 100 German warplanes.

Max Manus, 81, Dies - Fought Nazis in Occupied Norway - Obituary; Biography - NYTimes.com
 
When terrorist groups attack military personal they are engaging in terrorism. That's simple and fairly clear.

A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.
 
He was fighting on behalf of the legitimate government of a legitimate state in a military conflict between two states.

Even so, if he wasn't military it would have been perfectly legal for the German authorities to execute him if they had captured him.

If he acted completely on his own initiative, without sanction by the Norwegian govenment, then yes, he would be a terrorist.

This is why virtually all Western governments of occupied countries passed laws or decrees giving a full amnesty and pardon to all recognized resistance fighters after the war.
 
When terrorist groups attack military personal they are engaging in terrorism. That's simple and fairly clear.

A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.

You are deliberately conflating recognized reistance movements sanctioned and operating under control of legitimate governments of legitimate states with terrorist organizations.

This is of course consistent with your support for terrorism.
 
When terrorist groups attack military personal they are engaging in terrorism. That's simple and fairly clear.

A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.

According to the Nazis they were terrorists, thats all a matter of perspective.
 
When terrorist groups attack military personal they are engaging in terrorism. That's simple and fairly clear.

A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.

According to the Nazis they were terrorists, thats all a matter of perspective.

Saigon feels that the terrorist attacks against US military personnel in the Middle East are legitimate and can't be considered as terrorism.
 
Why are the terrorists in Syria called freedom fighters?

Why did the US once refer to the Taliban as freedom fighters but now call them terrorists?

I don't get it.
 
According to the Nazis they were terrorists, thats all a matter of perspective.

Exactly so!

I think most Norwegian's would support what these guys did, and I know I do.

I don't think this justifies what groups like Hamas or Hezbollah do, but I think it does establish that at times the right thing to do may be to take up arms against an aggressor.
 
When terrorist groups attack military personal they are engaging in terrorism. That's simple and fairly clear.

A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.
Maybe murkins should consider that ?
 
According to the Nazis they were terrorists, thats all a matter of perspective.

Exactly so!

I think most Norwegian's would support what these guys did, and I know I do.

I don't think this justifies what groups like Hamas or Hezbollah do, but I think it does establish that at times the right thing to do may be to take up arms against an aggressor.

Well to me Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist groups without a doubt, but of course you have people that don't see it that way and support them.
 
Why are the terrorists in Syria called freedom fighters?

Why did the US once refer to the Taliban as freedom fighters but now call them terrorists?

I don't get it.

With the Syrian opposition it's hard to know right now if they are people we should be supporting or not.

In fairness to the US government, the Taliban seemed like a force determined to throw the Soviets out, and I think most of us suported that goal - it's just a shame the US government didn't check out what kind of people they were first.
 
He was fighting on behalf of the legitimate government

According to who?

The Quisling government was the legal government of Norway - and this guy fought against them.

(I'll read your responses on this thread, because I think that's only fair since I quoted you)
 
So Hezbollah are terrorists?

Let me get this straight...Hezbollah (the terrorists) defeated the Israeli Army not once, but twice?

Are you sure you don't want to change that terrorist label to something else?

Take your time...
 
A quote of Arte's from another thread....

I just don't see the Norwegian resistance movement as being evil terrorists. I think they were defending their homes and families from Nazi oppression. I think they were right to do so.

According to the Nazis they were terrorists, thats all a matter of perspective.

Saigon feels that the terrorist attacks against US military personnel in the Middle East are legitimate and can't be considered as terrorism.

I disagree with that completely.
 
So Hezbollah are terrorists?

Let me get this straight...Hezbollah (the terrorists) defeated the Israeli Army not once, but twice?

Are you sure you don't want to change that terrorist label to something else?

Take your time...

Hezbollah never defeated the Israeli Army, wake up.:cuckoo:
 
Terrorist are defined by a minority of a given population waging terror to further their political position on the opposition and own people. So, is hezbollah, which is a minority, funded by those outside their country, an army? You have got to be wearing blinders, why else would they hide behind human shields and attack their own as well? They are nothing more than militant terrorist pawns of Iran.
 
Another interesting example...

The use of sabotage as an effective weapon was not heavily utilized until World War II. The German Army lost thousands of trains during the war due to acts of sabotage. German units were spread throughout Europe and many smaller units were targeted by resistance fighters. Ambushes were a common tactic used. Rail lines were very often targeted to disrupt the flow of materials and men for the German Army. Stretches of track were rigged with explosive charges and would be set to explode as the train passed over them. The resistance groups cost the German Army millions of dollars worth of equipment and had a large psychological effect on the German soldiers. By stalling and delaying the German forces, the Belgian Resistance group prevented the Axis from ever establishing a stable base of operations in occupied Belgium.

Belgian Resistance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Forum List

Back
Top