To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 16256
16255  |  16257
Subject: 
Re: jumping to conclusions
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 29 Apr 2002 10:47:46 GMT
Viewed: 
1524 times
  
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> writes:

This cannot be reduced to yes/no. I’m sure the Germans thought the
French Resistance were terrorists. Was William Wallace a terrorist?
Similarly, when does internal-terrorism end and a state of
civil-war begin? I’m not sure.


I think this is a very important point, which I would like to see more
focus on.  It is a sad fact that occupied people tend to use violent
and immoral action against the occupiying force.  It should also be
noted that such actions, which can be often be described as terrorism,
are commonly supported by the occupied people.  The history of
occupied Europe througout WWII should have teached us this.


An example from occupied Norway during WWII: The most famous act of
resistance was the sinking of the ferry "Hydro" on February 20th,
1944.  The ferry carried 600kg of heavy water, destined for German
atomic bomb research and production.  The action killed 12 German
troops and 14 civillians.  The action has ever since been hailed as an
heroic event, and there has been virtually no focus on its morally
problematic nature.


The event is described in the 1965 movie "The heroes of Telemark":

    http://www.imdb.com/Title?0059263


I feel confident that there are numerous similar events from other
parts of occupied Europe, in which violent actions of terrorism are
employed with the support of the occupied civillians.


Fredrik



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: jumping to conclusions
 
(...) I use the term "terrorism" as the specific, random targeting of civilians for the purpose of terrorizing them. Notice I don't even mention intent other than to terrorize. There is no rationality behind terrorism beyond terrorizing. It is (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: jumping to conclusions
 
Can I assume that you wholly agree with the text you have deleted? (...) You said “never”. I proved you wrong. There appears to be a lot of these “isolated incidents”? How many does it take to prove Israeli belligerence to you? (...) Which books? (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

88 Messages in This Thread:
































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR