Martin Sheen proud of uncle's IRA past

[IAN 2411]

Noun 1. terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act- the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

radical cell, terrorist cell - a cell of terrorists (usually 3 to 5 members); "to insure operational security the members of adjacent terrorist cells usually don't know each other or the identity of their leadership"

cyber-terrorist, cyberpunk, hacker - a programmer who breaks into computer systems in order to steal or change or destroy information as a form of cyber-terrorism

Jacobin - a member of the radical movement that instituted the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution

radical - a person who has radical ideas or opinions

sleeper - a spy or saboteur or terrorist planted in an enemy country who lives there as a law-abiding citizen until activated by a prearranged signal

suicide bomber - a terrorist who blows himself up in order to kill or injure other people



I had to check it out to answer your post Thorne.

But what about the firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo, for example? Where they actually aiming at military targets, or terrorizing civilians?

I don’t think there is any doubt in my mind that the allies can say what they like, but in the end they were atrocities. If the Germans had won the war and so too the Japanese, then again there is no doubt in my mind that the British and American high command would have been on trial for war crimes. However, we all know that the winners of wars will never admit guilt.

Be well IAN 2411

[Thorne]

I don’t think there is any doubt in my mind that the allies can say what they like, but in the end they were atrocities.

I agree. Atrocities by anybody's standards. Acts of terror in fact, designed to achieve a political as well as a military goal.

If the Germans had won the war and so too the Japanese, then again there is no doubt in my mind that the British and American high command would have been on trial for war crimes.

Which goes right along with denuseri's and my statement that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, or patriot.

However, we all know that the winners of wars will never admit guilt.

History tends to be written by the winners. A fact of life. If the German's had won, the London blitz would have been portrayed in a much better light, much as Dresden was. A sad necessity of combat.