| Re: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. This over-used cliche is as true as it is profound. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: soc.culture.canada · Group Profile
Author: Frank ArthurFrank Arthur Date: Apr 28, 2008 14:05
The problem with your "theory" "LS" gmail.com> is that
you need to explain this:
What would you say to a Jew in Poland in WWII is being rounded up by
the Nazis
for the extermination center of Auschwitz? Those Jews had no swords.
"LS" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b492e72a-c302-4893-beba-c4fb996e8903@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. This over-used
> cliche is as true as it is profound.
>
> The Brits considered George Washington a terrorist (at least a 18th
> Century version). Now we have the capital of the most-powerful
> nation
> in the world named after him.
>
> The Aparthied regime in South Africa (and its erstwhile Western
> supporters) considered Nelson Mandela a terrorist. Now he is the
> most
> respected international statesman alive.
>
> War is brutal and barbaric. No matter what the Geneva Convention
> says,
> there are no rules of war. How can it there be? Established nations
> would like to kill people their way (don't forget Hiroshima and
> Nagasaki). Liberation organizations have their way. Both are legit
> as
> long as you think war is legit. There is no morality in war.
>
> Now if you consider war wrong and you agree with a Gandhian way of
> doing things then you have a leg to stand on. Otherwise, don't waste
> you time arguing on-line, go back to your wars and killing.
>
> Remember - you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
|