Quote:
Originally posted by AndyW:
[QB] Ah, what an ugly can of worms: I would ask the question if "Today's terrorists are the same as freedom fighters in WW2?" like "Are terrorists freedom fighters, or vice versa, or both?"
Let's take the French WW II "resistance", as a very good example, though you can't compare it to todays Iraq (France declared war on Germany, France surrendered, Germany wasn't a democracy).
|
Love this topic, origins of the French Resistance was a critical element of my Doctoral thesis.
To deal with the larger issue first, there is no difference between 'Resistance' and 'terrorism' of the kind we are currently seeing in Iraq. In the latter case, it is nationalists, likely backed by limited foreign support, striking back against their occupiers, and what they see as their oppressors.
I am sure the Nazis, and for that matter, the Vichy authorities saw the early French resistants as terrorists as well, it is two sides of the same coin, and the distinction is only determined by their view in the popular media. Recent History is full of this. Mujahadin in 1980's Afghanistan were 'resistants' while Viet Cong Irregulars in the 1960s were 'terrorists'.
In the early 1990s, Chechens trying to break free from a colonial power were 'resistants', while the IRA were 'terrorists'. Palestinian soldiers are both resistants and terrorists, depending on who you talk to. There is no distinction except point of view in this matter.
To respond to AndyW, I cannot see what the nature of the original government has to do with anything at all. I think the resistances in France and Iraq bear striking similarity, and can be easily compared. We of course do not see them as moral equals, but that is once again our essentially emotional point of view and should not be used to accredit or discredit historical parables.