My thoughts, my experiences, and real-world solutions for an uncertain world.
Guerrilla Vs Terrorist - There IS a difference
Posted 07-18-2010 at 12:31 PM by milproakron
Tags guerrilla warfare, insurgency, military, terrorism
I have often heard the old phrase, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Many historic figures in warfare have been labeled freedom fighter, guerrilla, or terrorist, with political ideology generally being the dictator of the terminology choice.
But, there is a very real difference between a guerrilla fighter and a terrorist. Terrorism by its definition is designed to terrorize a populace and bring political pressure on a military operation. The suffering of the civilian population is intended to cause a loss of support for the terrorists enemies. It often backfires, but it has been effective in many cases such as Spain. The key to terrorist vs guerrilla is the target. Terrorists target unarmed civilians in their operations.
Guerrilla warfare on the other hand targets military operations. Guerrilla tactics have been a part of conflict since the beginning of time. Its typical of a small force trying to take on a much larger force. You can't defeat them in head on engagements, so you stick to the shadows, interrupt their operations, lay ambushes, disrupt supplies, and target key figures that may change the course of the conflict. We used them ourselves as Americans during our revolution and have employed them around the world at various times. Point being, guerrillas target enemy military forces, not civilian populations. The guerrillas will be counting on civilian support for their cause if their rebellion should be successful, so attacking those same civilians is a very bad tacic for freedom fighters.
So, once and for all, lets put an end to the idiotic saying that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Terrorists have no interest in freedom. Their only goal is destruction and oppressive rule. As long as they continue to attack civilians, the only respect they should be given is a quick and efficient demise.
But, there is a very real difference between a guerrilla fighter and a terrorist. Terrorism by its definition is designed to terrorize a populace and bring political pressure on a military operation. The suffering of the civilian population is intended to cause a loss of support for the terrorists enemies. It often backfires, but it has been effective in many cases such as Spain. The key to terrorist vs guerrilla is the target. Terrorists target unarmed civilians in their operations.
Guerrilla warfare on the other hand targets military operations. Guerrilla tactics have been a part of conflict since the beginning of time. Its typical of a small force trying to take on a much larger force. You can't defeat them in head on engagements, so you stick to the shadows, interrupt their operations, lay ambushes, disrupt supplies, and target key figures that may change the course of the conflict. We used them ourselves as Americans during our revolution and have employed them around the world at various times. Point being, guerrillas target enemy military forces, not civilian populations. The guerrillas will be counting on civilian support for their cause if their rebellion should be successful, so attacking those same civilians is a very bad tacic for freedom fighters.
So, once and for all, lets put an end to the idiotic saying that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Terrorists have no interest in freedom. Their only goal is destruction and oppressive rule. As long as they continue to attack civilians, the only respect they should be given is a quick and efficient demise.
Total Comments 8
Comments
-
Just read through and caught up on your bogs. Good stuff. Thanks.Posted 07-21-2010 at 10:15 PM by Brandhard 
-
Thanks for staying abreast of my latest rants and wandering thoughts. LoL Now if I could just get the government to listen, we might get somewhere.Posted 07-23-2010 at 07:32 PM by milproakron 
-
Fidel Castro to me is one of the greatest military/political leaders of my time. Here is a young man living in America, attending college and being offered a career as a pro ball player and his response to that was " No thank you But I must return to Cuba to become the new leader of my country" How focused is that! When you look back to that moment when Fidel moved to the mountains and manufactured his guerilla army to over throw Matista and control the country for as long as he did, and keeping control after his death is admirable. Agree or disagree, right or wrong I have not seen any leader in this country that can compete with that level of leadership and quickly assemble that number of under equipped soldiers and accomplish what he did.Posted 07-25-2010 at 10:16 PM by rockzombie - Yeah, but its really not that hard when your subjects are poor, uneducated, and unarmed.... and you have a tendency to murder anyone who is potentially in political opposition. LoL So yes, Castro did all those things well.
Posted 07-26-2010 at 06:08 PM by milproakron - LOL, he still is. Just because Raul took over doesn't mean Fidel ain't still in control. His revolution wasn't all that fast, it took nearly 6 years; July 1953 to Jan 1959, and Cuba is only slightly larger than Indiana. Oh and it's Batista, not Matista, that he ran out of Cuba.
Posted 07-29-2010 at 12:56 AM by DWFan - "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Trying to nitpic with psycho-babble wont change the fact that one mans trash is another mans treasure.
Posted 09-30-2010 at 12:09 AM by vermit55 - One man's trash may be another's treasure, but that doesn't change the fact that there is a DIFFERENCE between freedom fighters (Think KNU /KNLA Karen Nation Liberation Army) and terrorists. (such as Chechnyans.)
Posted 09-30-2010 at 03:06 PM by Brandhard - The only difference is who gets to write the history book. We all know that.
The founding fathers of this United States were terrorists , we all know they gave the natives infected chickpox blackets to kill all the tribes. Its who ever wins that gets to write history. Im native and I know this was my country before it was yours. So you won the war and its yours now. But our brothers the Brown People from the south , without guns are taking over. Little by little. Your granddaughter will marry a Whan or a Gutierrez. Are they terrorists? Theyll be writing the history books in about 50 years and call the white man Terrorists. There is no difference.Posted 09-30-2010 at 03:43 PM by vermit55
