What is the difference between freedom fighters and terrorists

Khatchadourian, Haig. Terrorism and Morality, Journal of Applied Philosophy, 5, no. Lenini, Pete. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, Lerner, Craig S. Maria, Norberto. Matloff, Judith. Medrano Juan, Diez.

Divided nations: class, politics, and nationalism in the Basque Country and Catalonia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, Moreno, Luis.

Panait, Alexandru. The Madrid Train Bombings. Teichmen, Jenny. Tuman, Joseph S. Wells, Donald A. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, , 9. Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing. E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team.

Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks! Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.

One motivation there. Mix of anger and helplessness produces an urge to strike out. You are angry. You are feeling helpless. You want retribution.

You want to wreak retributive justice. The experience of violence by a stronger party has historically turned victims into terrorists. Battered children are known to become abusive parents and violent adults. That's what happens to peoples and nations. When they are battered, they hit back.

State terror very often breeds collective terror. Do you recall the fact that the Jews were never terrorists? By and large Jews were not known to commit terror except during and after the Holocaust.

Most studies show that the majority of members of the worst terrorist groups in Israel or in Palestine, the Stern and the Irgun gangs, were people who were immigrants from the most anti-Semitic countries of Eastern Europe and Germany.

Similarly, the young Shiites of Lebanon or the Palestinians from the refugee camps are battered people. They become very violent. The ghettos are violent internally. They become violent externally when there is a clear, identifiable external target, an enemy where you can say, 'Yes, this one did it to me'.

Then they can strike back. Example is a bad thing. Example spreads. There was a highly publicized Beirut hijacking of the TWA plane. After that hijacking, there were hijacking attempts at nine different American airports. Pathological groups or individuals modeling on the others.

Even more serious are examples set by governments. When governments engage in terror, they set very large examples. When they engage in supporting terror, they engage in other sets of examples.

Absence of revolutionary ideology is central to victim terrorism. Revolutionaries do not commit unthinking terror. Those of you who are familiar with revolutionary theory know the debates, the disputes, the quarrels, the fights within revolutionary groups of Europe, the fight between anarchists and Marxists, for example.

But the Marxists have always argued that revolutionary terror, if ever engaged in, must be sociologically and psychologically selective. Don't hijack a plane. Don't hold hostages. Don't kill children, for God's sake. Have you recalled also that the great revolutions, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Algerian, the Cuban, never engaged in hijacking type of terrorism?

They did engage in terrorism, but it was highly selective, highly sociological, still deplorable, but there was an organized, highly limited, selective character to it. So absence of revolutionary ideology that begins more or less in the post-World War II period has been central to this phenomenon. My final question is - These conditions have existed for a longtime. But why then this flurry of private political terrorism? Why now so much of it and so visible? The answer is modern technology.

You have a cause. You can communicate it through radio and television. They will all come swarming if you have taken an aircraft and are holding Americans hostage.

They will all hear your cause. You have a modern weapon through which you can shoot a mile away. They can't reach you. And you have the modern means of communicating. When you put together the cause, the instrument of coercion and the instrument of communication, politics is made.

A new kind of politics becomes possible. To this challenge rulers from one country after another have been responding with traditional methods. The traditional method of shooting it out, whether it's missiles or some other means. The Israelis are very proud of it. The Americans are very proud of it. The French became very proud of it. Now the Pakistanis are very proud of it. The Pakistanis say, 'Our commandos are the best. A central problem of our time, political minds, rooted in the past, and modern times, producing new realities.

Therefore in conclusion, what is my recommendation to America? First, avoid extremes of double standards. If you're going to practice double standards, you will be paid with double standards. Don't use it. Don't condone Israeli terror, Pakistani terror, Nicaraguan terror, El Salvadoran terror, on the one hand, and then complain about Afghan terror or Palestinian terror. It doesn't work. Try to be even-handed. A superpower cannot promote terror in one place and reasonably expect to discourage terrorism in another place.

It won't work in this shrunken world. Do not condone the terror of your allies. Condemn them. Fight them. Punish them. Please eschew, avoid covert operations and low-intensity warfare. These are breeding grounds of terror and drugs. Violence and drugs are bred there. The structure of covert operations, I've made a film about it, which has been very popular in Europe, called Dealing with the Demon.

I have shown that wherever covert operations have been, there has been the central drug problem. That has been also the center of the drug trade.

Because the structure of covert operations, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Central America, is very hospitable to drug trade. Avoid it. Give it up. It doesn't help. Please focus on causes and help ameliorate causes. Try to look at causes and solve problems. Do not concentrate on military solutions. Do not seek military solutions. Terrorism is a political problem. Seek political solutions. Diplomacy works. Take the example of the last attack on Bin Laden.

You don't know what you're attacking. They say they know, but they don't know. Title Freedom fighters or terrorists by another name? Authors William J. Comments Bailey, W. Abstract The term "terrorism" has been over-used in recent history. Related Publications Bailey, W. This document is currently not available here. On another issue, Mr. Museveni criticized government agricultural price supports in many European nations. He said those supports put Africa's exports at a disadvantage.

The Ugandan president drew some laughs when he said he tries to bring his own food when traveling abroad but is sometimes forced to buy products elsewhere. First of all, the pineapple was very hard, I have never encountered a hard pineapple until the one in London. It is also less sweet and has an ammonia-like pungent taste. Museveni said it is a shame that Europeans are forced to eat inferior foods against better quality foods from Africa.