jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (8 posts)

Terrorists and rebels

  1. laswi profile image60
    laswiposted 7 years ago

    Al-Qaeda (Al-Kaida) is considered as a terrorist organization by US and Western nations. But other ruthless terrorist organizations in small poor countries are considered as "rebels" by them. Why?mad

    1. de'Arab profile image50
      de'Arabposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      They are considered "rebels" to the westerners because they pose no direct threat to them. They are "rebels" to their own country and people."Terrorism" is the term used when the western nations are in threat by foreign insurgents.

  2. profile image0
    Ghost32posted 7 years ago

    As I understand it, the distinction does not always lie in what they do...but in who they do it to. 

    If the terrorist is violent toward people or property in his own native country, he (or she) may be considered a rebel.  That is, "rebelling" against the rules and regulations under which he/she must live.

    If on the other hand the violent individual aims that violence toward something or someone either (a) outside of his/her native country or (b) without direct authority over him...then you're looking at a terrorist. 

    A rebel, of course, can be BOTH a rebel AND a terrorist.  But some terrorists are clearly not rebels.

    Unfortunately, it's also true that in certain cases, a given country (not always limited to the U.S. and Western countries) may either sympathize with a terrorist organization OR decide to support such a group for either ideological or "practical" political reasons. 

    In the end, it's probably best never to trust someone else's "label" when applied to any group or even an individual...but rather to do your own research and thinking, and decide for yourself.

  3. mikelong profile image71
    mikelongposted 7 years ago

    It is inaccurate to make this a bipolar issue...it cannot be terrorist and rebel alone....

    Someone who commits acts of terror can be considered an "adventurer" and "visionary", like William Walker....the United States supported this man's ventures...and many others like his....

    The "rebels" were then those who stood against Walker's actions...and contrary to the will of United Fruit, and other forces....

    So, terrorist can become national heroes...or at least figures of great status who don't have to worry about any legal, political, or social repercussions to their actions...

    Shell Oil enabled the Nigerian military to kidnap and kill Ogoni leaders....people who were trying to get Shell to take responsibility for the harm their work is doing to the Ogoni's homeland.....

    Shell is a household name here.....and their profits are not being confiscated by anti-terror taskforces...and we are not invading the Shell headquarters to arrest these criminals.....

    Instead Shell pays out 15 and a half million to make a lawsuit go away......and Americans continue to support Shell's terrorism whenever they fill their tanks at their stations....

    Also, terrorism does not only relate to violence.......rather all one needs to invoke is the threat of an action....terrorism can be caused through the passing of leaflets, or by the use of symbols worn or put up in public places.....it takes a variety of forms....

  4. theirishobserver. profile image61
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Most terrorists are eventually invited into the marbled corridors of democracy, The IRA, Gaddafi, etc etc when it suits political agendas to call terrorists rebels or rebels terrorists thats the way it is, the Contra 'Rebels' were supported by America as they were seen as anti-communist....during the cold war America supported the very 'terrorists' they are now fighting in Afghanistan....because back then they were viewed as anti-communist.......scarry stuff.....

  5. kephrira profile image58
    kephriraposted 7 years ago

    Terrorism is a specific method. If you attack civilians or make attacks against the government which are designed only to kill people and make other people scared (terrified), without actually attaining any military / strategic objective other than this fear, then you are a terrorist. As other people have said, a rebel may be a terrorist, they may be part of a conventional or guerilla army fighting a civil war (in which case a government may wrongly describe them as terrorists because it sounds worse) or they may be entirely non-violent, such as the rebels of Iran, or Ghandi's rebellion against the British Empire which used peaceful non-cooperation rather than armed insurrection.

  6. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image59
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 7 years ago

    The area of operation of Al Kaida is more and their objectives are against a section of humanity. They justify their cruelties and think they are acting on behalf of and for their god.

    In small nations, the terrorists' objectives are limited to their own country and its rulers. It hurts no other country. So, the Al Kaida, being called as terrorist organisation is very much justified. It should be routed out, if civilised and lawful societies are to be protected.

    Let Al Kaida build twin towers in all Islamic countries, instead of destroying them

  7. C.V.Rajan profile image77
    C.V.Rajanposted 7 years ago

    If your son steals at your home, it's your family problem. There are some problems with your upbringing of your child; you better sort it out yourself.

    If he steals at MY house, he is a thief!