What's the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?
952220
They are the same thing, it only depends on if you agree with them or not; \n\nYES = freedom fighter \n\nNO = terrorist\n\nExample: The Sons of Liberty were considered freedom fighters in the British Colonies, but their actions were considered terrorist by England.
733442
really good question(one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist)this is just powerful countries propaganda,i agree\nwith you about oil and the dollar(changing to euros really\nhurt the USA. FACT)put it this way,just imagine someone\ntried to invade the UK and occupied us.some of us take up\narms and start a campaign of guerrilla warfare.we would\nbe labelled terrorists by some and freedom fighters by\nothers.its simply down to who has the power.I think this\nwhole world has been manipulated by bush and blairs\nlies about this war(they new once they got there ,people\nwould just forget about the lies and deceit and be glad\nthey ousted saddam)now they have a civil war on their\nhands.(but at least they have control of the oil and huge\nspoils of war.IE contracts for rebuild)I think our soldiers\nshould come home,to many have died already for some\nof the worst straight faced liars on the planet.
492521
Good question!\n\nThe obvious answer is, a terrorists is anybody who kills people you like, and the guys killing people we don't like, aren't, they're FREEDOM fighters!\n\nSo you answer your own question -  If somebody blows-up YOUR loved ones, are they terrorists or freedom fighters?\n\nYou see, there's no absolute truths in life! truth is a function of the circumstances!\n\nAlways has been, always will.\n\nSo don't let the demigods, otherwise known as politicians, mislead you.  Everybody has an agenda.  If you seek absolute truth, it's gonna be a long journey!\n\nIn the meantime, I'm supporting those who kill people who want to do harm to people I like, like my kids and grandkids!\n\nVaya con dios, amigo!
1002020
Freedom Fighter!!!!!.....bull shit.....hez a terrorist....
813176
I think he was more a bomber than a terrorist. But he could be considered both.
942870
You are more likely to be a victim of crime than terrorism. This just shows you where their priorities lie. Scaremongering rather than solving.
481627
terrorist comes from the word terror. when you think of terror, what do you think of? i doubt that it is a race that comes to your mind.
1088391
Terrorism:\n  A word the United States government tells its media to say when the freedom fighters of the invaded country try to win back what the U.S. wants to push its totalitarian regime(new world order) on the invaded country,other state,local municipalities. in other words it is someone who has a pair and gives all and is willing to fight to the death to regain lost ground and does not want what the U.N. pushes.
745558
Terrorism is both an ideology and a tactic.  Their goals are wanting change.  It depends on what terrorist organization you are talking about.  Most in South America their goals were to overthrow the current government.  And terrorism was their tactic, guerilla warfare.  In the Middle East it is more of an ideology, they are claiming their religion wants them to do this, hence they call it a Jihad.  But it is also a tactic because they use terrorism to try and achieve their goals, which is to get rid of all infidels, which are us, non-Muslims.
396506
Bin meaning Osama Bin Laden? One's a terrorist who has every single government force after him, the other is a terrorist who has every single government force working for him.
1090096
This is an unusual question - I am not sure I understand your question, but if so, basically I think that what you are asking is, are the one's called terrorists, done so because of the way the media portrays them, rather than the cause they are fighting for.\nIf so, I would say no. Freedom fighters are normally labelled "rebels".\nIf they use tactics such as attacking civilians, mosques, churches community centres etc to try and make their point, ie scaring people into submitting to their will, or force people to act in a certain way, this makes them terrorists, ie the use of terror as a political means.\nTheir are two types of opponents to the USA in Iraq for example. The so-called "insurgents", who are rebels, who just want to remove the Allied forces from their country. And terrorists who are destroying mosques and killing civilians to ensure their religion is the most powerful one in the new Iraq, once the western powers have left.
316259
the greatest difference between religious and non-religious terrorism lies in the fact that religious bigots are able to brianwash the peoples minds on religious pretexts. this has become more dangerous as they see no reason. this is greatest threat from such dirty minds.\nthough terrorism in any shape is unwelcome but in extraneous situations at least other half is able to see reason or give credence to ideas.
434814
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. \nWhether guerilla tactics are evil depends on whether we use them against others or whether they are used against us. \nAt one point in time American settlers were considered terrorists against the English crown, and Israel was helped into existance by Mossad, then considered terrorists by the English (again), for killing civilians and bombing buildings in order to create the Jewish homeland.\nI believe that the press coverage of Iraq and terrorism tends to use the word "terrorism" a bit too liberally. A lot of attacks against American troups are doubtlessly perfomed by "real" terrorists a.k.a. al Quaida, people that are not fighting FOR anything but rather AGAINST everything, against America and the West to be exact. Many of them aren't Iraqis but muslim secretly brought into the country and trained in geuerilla warfare, as terrorist, to be used, if possible, somewhere else later. \nOn the other hand there are insurgents, probably more everyones idea of freedom fighters. They fight FOR a free Iraq (whatever they mean with this). They are Iraquis and they feel their cuntry has been invaded, and they bloody well want to do something about it. Calling them terrorists seems a stretch.
198413
Terrorism and revolution are quite different.\nTerrorists target civilizations and use "terror" to bring about their change.  Revolutionaries target the government they feel is oppressing them.\nHowever, as they say: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
693176
the answer to this is ONE MANY TERRORIST IS ANOTHER MAN'S FREEDOM FIGHTER  it all makes sense if u think about to the israealies sucide bombers are terrorists and to the plastinians they are freedom fighters trying to get the occupiers out of THEIR homeland.
887677
Instilling fear in people is terrorism, eg. "shock and awe", "all options are on the table".  \n\nAnyone who uses force or the threat of force to coerce others into compliance and obedience is a terrorist.  \n\n"War is terrorism practiced by the rich.  \nTerrorism is war practiced by the poor."\n- unknown\n\n\n.
432378
Suicide Bombers = Terrorists who kill others along with themselves.\n\nMurderers = People who kill others with or without reasons.\n\nMartyrs = People who choose to die for their beliefs, religious and/or political, without the use of violence (attacks and counter-attacks); in other words, they choose to be "sacrificed" willingly like Jesus.\n\nThus, suicide bombers are NEITHER murderers NOR martyrs, they are Terrorists.