Frlf Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 tl;dr version: Beslan, Russia on the year 2004. It's the first day of school. The biggest school on the region has been raided. All the people around were taken into a gymnasium that was just 10 meters wide and 25 meters long, and there were at least over 1200 hostages. The outcry for this attack was to get to an end the Second Chechen War. There was many gun fighting and bombs, bla bla bla. The hostages stayed there for 3 days, until the Rusian security forces attacked back with tanks, rockets, and other heavy weapons. The attackers defended. About 300 hostages were killed, and many other were injured. Second Chechen War: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_WarBeslan Incident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_hostage_crisis Okay, now to the point of this thread: I know Wikipedia says that they are terrorists, but I want to know if the attackers were really terrorists, and if so, why? They commited war crimes, and they violated human rights, but other than that, is there any reason why they should be called terrorists, and reasons why NOT to be called terrorists? Other than the obvious, of course. There isn't a ground definition for terrorism, but it's something like a thing to create terror by attacking defenseless people, or acts of unlawful violence. Reps for best answers (It's like the only way any one will post on this thread, either way). If this should be moved to debates, do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Maybe I'm just sleepy, but I don't understand the question. Are we supposed to debate about whether these people are terrorists or not? My definition of terrorism is attacking another country. So I'll say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. From Great Britain's point of view, all the Americans in revolt were terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I agree that this's terrible, but what's this to the 1 million Iraqi "casualties of war"? Innocent Iraqis being butchered by malicious or incompetent forces. It's about 3333.33 times less. =/ Still though, I'd be funking terrified in either place though, the school or anywhere in Iraq. Apparently, when a Government does it, it's not terrorism? Pretty retarded. My definition of terrorism is attacking another country. ...Really? >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
六兆年と一夜物語 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I thought this was a thread about a Bilesbian. You cannot trust any sources on the internet. You must see their point of view. After that, you can make your final judgment. Why can't you trust the internet? It's too biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frlf Posted October 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. From Great Britain's point of view' date=' all the Americans in revolt were terrorists.[/quote'] Exactly why I made the thread. The people there wanted an end to the war that was taking on their country (Russia took control of their capital), but doing so, they did do some actions that countries would classify was terrorism. @Dark: Yes. Also, the ''terrorists'' were from another country, so for you, they were terrorists? @Polaris: I do understand, but lets just focus on this event. I don't want this to turn into a bawwweveryonehatesrepublicans thread. @Ramanga: If I did trust everything I would've just taken what Wiki said and not asked. I am trying to think rationally, and I want to see more than 1 point of view. Yes, the world is biased Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntar! Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 No. They're not from the middle-east! [/american stereotype] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milk-Chan Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. From Great Britain's point of view' date=' all the Americans in revolt were terrorists.[/quote'] You beat me to it.I ask, how can one be called a Terrorist, if they are not saw as terror in ones eyes, but as a hero? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehmani Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 A terrorist is someone who campaigns using violence (but NOT JUST violence). Nelson Mandela was a terrorist, technically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasu Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. From Great Britain's point of view' date=' all the Americans in revolt were terrorists.[/quote'] You beat me to it.I ask, how can one be called a Terrorist, if they are not saw as terror in ones eyes, but as a hero?Different social context maybe >< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frlf Posted October 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 bamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 My villain may be your hero.Your villain may be my hero. Your hero is my villain.My hero is your villain...., demanding an end to the Second Chechen War, took more than 1,100 people (including some 777 children) ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Altair Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Terrorism is doing something violent, stupid and international. That wasn't stupid, a war is however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frlf Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Terrorism is doing something violent' date=' stupid and international. That wasn't stupid, a war is however.[/quote'] So they WEREN'T terrorists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Welche Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 In my opinion, we are all terrorists in our own little planet called Kazomo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Mousy Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 In war, we all commit war crimes, it's just the victor doesn't get caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.