Re: Guerillas...terrorists...now REBELS? -- Revolutions and Democracy in Latin America

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 17:04:55 02/21/02 Thu
Author: Kate Sacrison
Subject: Re: Guerillas...terrorists...now REBELS?
In reply to: Venu Bhakhri 's message, "Re: Guerillas...terrorists...now REBELS?" on 12:05:06 02/21/02 Thu

>Terrorists think they have a cause - for instance, Timothy McVeigh was making an anti-U.S. government statement, he seemed to feel, by bombing a federal building. It's a question of who else thinks it's a "cause". McVeigh could be seen as rebelling against the government, but, as I believe was said in class, he had little chance of success, and was most likely aware of that. Guerrillas have more of an opportunity to change things, it would seem.

I think groups are labeled as terrorists, guerrillas
>or rebels because society needs to know what group of
>people are good or harmful to them. In societies such
>as the United States, it becomes important to judge
>people to know more about them so they can find out
>how harmful they can be. Thus, people tend to label
>groups based on their assumption of fear. If a group
>seems to be dangerous (by dangerous i mean threatening
>to one's life) they are labeled as terrorists. If a
>group seems to be fighting for a cause they are
>labeled as rebels, revolutionaries, and guerrillas.
>For example, the Osama Bin Laden and his group are
>labeled as terrorists because they harm innocent
>people for no reasonable cause. Since they are
>labeled as terrorists people tend to believe that we
>should fight against them. Because of the society
>knows what people are "good" and what group of people
>are "bad." This is just what i believe. What do you
>guys think?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Guerillas...terrorists...now REBELS? -- Ana Hermosillo, 20:56:40 02/28/02 Thu

Re: Guerillas...terrorists...now REBELS? -- Andrea Lombardo, 13:52:15 03/03/02 Sun