Despicable terrorism or Viva la resistance?

[Pendragon]

Recently an Iraqi officer killed 4 US soldiers with a car bomb at roadblock in Iraq.

Should this be labelled terrorism or a valid act resistance against foreign aggressors?

Does it make any difference that all the casualties were combatants in an invading army?

Does it make a difference that th bomber appears to be military himself?

Would it be different if it had been french resistance fighter who blew up a german patrol in france 60 years ago?

Or an american blowing up soldiers from a foreign army on hypothetically invaded/conquered US soil?

[Kuroneko]

Whether the Iraqi soldier blew up enemy troops with a car bomb or with a bazooka makes absolutely no difference as far as I'm concerned. Doing this to disable a tank would be viewed as a legitimate action of war, no more or less wrong than other deaths in a war, but somehow the fact that it's a car makes it special? Absurd.

[Pendragon]

Damn, why you gotta go and be reasonable right at the start of the thread! If this thread dies without discussion after this I'll know who to blame!

[Lord_Xerxes]

Whether the Iraqi soldier blew up enemy troops with a car bomb or with a bazooka makes absolutely no difference as far as I'm concerned. Doing this to disable a tank would be viewed as a legitimate action of war, no more or less wrong than other deaths in a war, but somehow the fact that it's a car makes it special? Absurd.

I'm going to have to agree with Kuro here. The method of delivery for the deaths doesn't change the act or the fact that it's during a war time. These things happen during war. If this were during peace time though, I'd have to say that it would be an act of terrorism and not so much a retaliation to an invading force or a resistance action as you put it.

[Pendragon]

Just to thwart the dragon, I'll try and kill the thread.
Watch my über-thread bustah rifle
*charging
*charging
*CHARGING
post count +1

Well fuck, and I was honestly trying to make a serious thread...
Now I just feel like doing some carbombing myself.

And its fucking Pendragon, not Pen Dragon. Not a winged lizard that hoards stationary. This aint D&D kid.

[Thirdfain]

Playing the Devil's Advocate...

By using a car bomb as a weapon, the Iraqi is making cars seem like targets to U.S. troops. Perhaps the next time Allied troops see a car drive up to a roadblock, they will be more willing to open fire... and that car may contain only innocents. By causing Allied troops to be more aggressive, he is risking the lives of his countrymen. I'm grasping at straws here.

Sadly, I would have to wager that the Iraqi was just a young man, no different from the ones who fought for American freedom during our ownrevolution. He probably never gassed a Kurdish village or tortured a dissident. He is probably just a young patriot. It is a damn shame to have young men and women like himself die so a monster like Saddam can stay in power.

[Sea Skimmer]

If he was out of uniform its terrorism.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Playing the Devil's Advocate...

By using a car bomb as a weapon, the Iraqi is making cars seem like targets to U.S. troops. Perhaps the next time Allied troops see a car drive up to a roadblock, they will be more willing to open fire... and that car may contain only innocents. By causing Allied troops to be more aggressive, he is risking the lives of his countrymen. I'm grasping at straws here.

Sadly, I would have to wager that the Iraqi was just a young man, no different from the ones who fought for American freedom during our ownrevolution. He probably never gassed a Kurdish village or tortured a dissident. He is probably just a young patriot. It is a damn shame to have young men and women like himself die so a monster like Saddam can stay in power.

Already happened...

and

Bingo, you're On The Money.

[Slartibartfast]

Recently an Iraqi officer killed 4 US soldiers with a car bomb at roadblock in Iraq.

Should this be labelled terrorism or a valid act resistance against foreign aggressors?

Does it make any difference that all the casualties were combatants in an invading army?

Does it make a difference that th bomber appears to be military himself?

Would it be different if it had been french resistance fighter who blew up a german patrol in france 60 years ago?

Or an american blowing up soldiers from a foreign army on hypothetically invaded/conquered US soil?

ok, like some US general said:

THE IRAQIS ARE CHEATING! THEY AREN'T WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS AND ARE TRYING TO KILL US WITHOUT WARNING! THAT IS UNFAIR! THEY SHOULD USE ALL THEIR ABRAMS AND BRADLEYS AND TRY TO BEAT US ONE-ON-ONE!

[Vympel]

If he was out of uniform its terrorism.

I disagree. I have a huge problem with opening the door to calling every resistance fighter on the planet, regardless of what they do, a terrorist, for not fighting in uniform. The litmus test for whether you're a terrorist isn't whether you wear a uniform, it's what you're attacking.

All this guy did was sacrifice himself to kill the enemy. Not a special incident.

[Queeb Salaron]

ok, like some US general said:

THE IRAQIS ARE CHEATING! THEY AREN'T WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS AND ARE TRYING TO KILL US WITHOUT WARNING! THAT IS UNFAIR! THEY SHOULD USE ALL THEIR ABRAMS AND BRADLEYS AND TRY TO BEAT US ONE-ON-ONE!

But we applaud the American revolutionaries who used guerilla-style war tactics to pick of the British, don't we? We call it a victory of the mind rather than a victory of firepower. We call it being clever. We likened ourselves to the smaller man in Aristotle's technique of Greco-Roman wrestling, using different techniques to beat the stronger man. We called ourselves smarter for using the terrain to our advantage, for being sneaky, for outwitting the opponent. Isn't that what the Iraqi (soldier?) did here?

And what about that saying, "all's fair in love and NFL playoffs"? (GO PATS!)

[Illuminatus Primus]

If he was out of uniform its terrorism.

All the partisans who've dressed in civilian clothes are "terrorists" now?

How exactly do you "terrorize" military troops involved in a present conflict with your country?

[weemadando]

That action is a legitimate action by a guerilla group.

It was perpetuated by a para-military organisation against a military target.

It WAS an act of terror in that it was meant to cause lasting damage both physical and psychological, but it WAS NOT terrorism.

[Slartibartfast]

ok, like some US general said:

THE IRAQIS ARE CHEATING! THEY AREN'T WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS AND ARE TRYING TO KILL US WITHOUT WARNING! THAT IS UNFAIR! THEY SHOULD USE ALL THEIR ABRAMS AND BRADLEYS AND TRY TO BEAT US ONE-ON-ONE!

But we applaud the American revolutionaries who used guerilla-style war tactics to pick of the British, don't we? We call it a victory of the mind rather than a victory of firepower. We call it being clever. We likened ourselves to the smaller man in Aristotle's technique of Greco-Roman wrestling, using different techniques to beat the stronger man. We called ourselves smarter for using the terrain to our advantage, for being sneaky, for outwitting the opponent. Isn't that what the Iraqi (soldier?) did here?

And what about that saying, "all's fair in love and NFL playoffs"? (GO PATS!)

I was being sarcastic

[Strate_Egg]

Yes, these people are terrorists. Of course, there is no FAIR in war, but the US is trying to minimize civilian casualties. They are deliberatly utilizing civilian clothes and vehicles to blow themselves up killing our soldiers who don't fire back because of a fear to kill innocents. That is terrorism. Now if we didnt give a shit, it wouldnt be a problem.

[Strate_Egg]

It has nothing to do with revolutionaries. It moreso has to do with breaking the laws of the geneva convention. One major difference between our forces and those of other aggressors is that we care who we kill.

[Hobot]

terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

It's war and the Iraqi's are defending their homeland; they're not trying to intimidate anyone for ideological or political reasons. The entire US and British invasion of Iraq is unlawful so they can't really protest when Iraq starts using desparate tactics. The only reason the Coallition forces care so much about not killing civillians is because the war is already very unpopular.

[Howedar]

The entire US and British invasion of Iraq is unlawful

Don't be stupid. There's no such thing as international law, only international agreements.

[Kuroneko]

Don't be stupid. There's no such thing as international law, only international agreements.

Agreements which are binding. Besides, agreement is the primary mechanism by which law is established, in all but dictatorships.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Anyone who thinks that real law and order flows, in the present day, from much else besides nation-states is delusional.

[The_Nice_Guy]

This is guerilla war, not terrorism. Target is a legitimate military being.

However, if caught, whether the Iraqi is subject to war crimes depends if he is wearing some sort of uniform. You know, an identifying piece of clothing.

The Nice Guy

[Ignorant twit]

Yep it is unlawful. The laws of war, such as they are, exist to protect civillians. When these are not honored the victims are the civillians. If the only way you can attack is by pissing on civillian protections then your cause is screwed already.

Striking a purely symbolic blow while simultaneously decreasing the safety of your fellow countrymen sounds stupid to me.

[Zoink]

Partisans are allowed under international law, even when even when the main gov't has surrendered. However, they are required to have a distinct marking (like an armband or something) to distinguish themselves from civilians. Most of the WW2 resistance groups followed this rule. A partisan following this rule must be treated as a POW and not a terrorist.

This rule isn't made to make them easier to find/kill, its simply something that must be done to protect civilians.

[Strate_Egg]

The whole idea that the war is unpopular is ludicrous. Hippies with peace sighns is appaling when looking at the WMD that he has HIDDEN under schools in in play yards and bunkers.

I thought they said he did not have these BANNED weapons? War isn't good compared to peace, but idots waving peace signs go to far in the face of evidence.



THe iraqies are brainwashed morons. The Iraqi defense ministry INSISTS that the Coalition forces are not even IN bagdad. This is the utter bullshit they shove off as real.

As for the terrorism bit, its still terrorism war or not. Utilizing civilians to kill themselves, or HIDING behind civilians like the cowards they are is wrong. This war IS just and moral. Anyone who suppports that dictator should leave their country and live there for a day under such oppression where your toung is cut out if ya speak. The only reason HALF the the civilians of Iraq were opposed to the war was because of intimidation in which military officials were lying in wait at there homes. Many of them supported US troops openly when the threat of Iraqi bozos was gone.


This war is a completely different ball-game when comparing it to wars of conquest, which it is NOT. They lied, they are war criminals, they kill their own civilians, they deserve to be taken out.

[Queeb Salaron]

The whole idea that the war is unpopular is ludicrous. Hippies with peace sighns is appaling when looking at the WMD that he has HIDDEN under schools in in play yards and bunkers.

Whoa there, little one. Can you link me to the source of that information? Because last time I checked, everything that Scott Ritter and Hans Blix found was in military compounds, and everything US troops found (which is still unconfirmed, but hopeful) was also in a military compound.

I thought they said he did not have these BANNED weapons? War isn't good compared to peace, but idots waving peace signs go to far in the face of evidence.

Again, WHAT weapons? Blix found weaponry COMPONENTS, and they were destroyed. And if you're referring to the chemical weapons found today (or was it yesterday?), there still has been no independent confirmation that they are actually chemical weapons.

THe iraqies are brainwashed morons. The Iraqi defense ministry INSISTS that the Coalition forces are not even IN bagdad. This is the utter bullshit they shove off as real.

Well, yes. But there's a whole thread dedicated to this over in Politics. You should go take a look over there.

As for the terrorism bit, its still terrorism war or not. Utilizing civilians to kill themselves, or HIDING behind civilians like the cowards they are is wrong.

Umm... That's not the issue at hand. We're talking about an Iraqi officer who blew up a car as a war tactic. As far as we know, civilians weren't involved.

This war IS just and moral. Anyone who suppports that dictator should leave their country and live there for a day under such oppression where your toung is cut out if ya speak.

Amen.

The only reason HALF the the civilians of Iraq were opposed to the war was because of intimidation in which military officials were lying in wait at there homes. Many of them supported US troops openly when the threat of Iraqi bozos was gone.

That and, like you said, they may be brainwashed into following Sadaam. Same way fundies are brainwashed into following the Lord.

This war is a completely different ball-game when comparing it to wars of conquest, which it is NOT. They lied, they are war criminals, they kill their own civilians, they deserve to be taken out.

Well, ok, but then why aren't we going to help out in the Congo? And why don't we send troops to Israel? It's a lot more complicated than I think you give it credit for. Yes, there are moral reasons for starting this war, but those are not the only motivations. Some are political, and some may even be personal. And I do believe that there will be domestic oil companies setting up shop in Iraq after this war is over, either directly or by buying out existing Iraqi oil companies. In that sense, it WILL be a war of conquest, though that is not our primary objective.