Quote:
Originally Posted by ila
Does it make it any less of a terrorist act because the target was military?
Is it okay to attack anyone because they are military?
Are soldiers any less deserving to live than civilians?
|
So what makes a terrorist? if the millitary are not legitimate targets, then why is not terrorist and soldier interchangeable? Should all soldiers be taken away as terrorists? Should we demolish war memorials to stop the glorification of terrorism? If funding terrorism illegal, then should we all be arrested for paying taxes that get used on the military? Is hte USA the biggest terrorist nation, because it spends more on it's terrorists than any other nation? Are 1 in 8 Americans terrorists or ex terrorists?
Take your statement and reverse it.
Is it okay to attack anyone because they are terrorists?
Are terrorists any less deserving to live than civilians?
I can accept either stance, but the thing I demand is consistancy, if there are no legitimate targets, then that makes all soldiers terrorist criminals, even if they only defend thier nations against invading militarys.
Fact is, Terrorist means 'them on the other side', 'the enemy', 'the huns', 'the gooks', 'the ragheads', it's just another word to dehumanise the enemy, it's always 'them' who are the terrorist, never 'us'. Our fighters are the soldiers hte enemy's fighters are the terrorists. Our's are brave, the enemy's are cowards. When asked what's the difference, the reply is always, they kill civilians, they kill kids, we don't and if we do, it's by accident. But the real difference is, they fight against us, and our soldiers fight for us. Whoever the fuck us is.
So you tell me, what do you call a terrorist?