Author Topic: Wait...Now they're rebels? (Read 771 times)

muckmaw · « **on:** October 30, 2003, 07:28:15 AM »

Rebels Attack; Int'l Groups Bolt Baghdad
18 minutes ago

By SLOBODAN LEKIC, Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents blasted a freight train west of Baghdad and exploded a bomb near a convoy in a northern city, injuring a U.S. soldier, on Thursday as international organizations continued their exodus from Iraq

HUH? Don't you need a formal government to have a rebellion?

Maybe I'm oversensitive, but this reads to me like Yahoo is trying to paint the terrorists as a more organized force. Another bleak portrayal by the AP, IMO.

Vermillion · « **Reply #1 on:** October 30, 2003, 07:38:40 AM »

Yah I saw CNN refer to them as "Resistance Fighters" this morning, which tends to give them some respectability, rather than the terrorist scum they are.

DmdNexus · « **Reply #2 on:** October 30, 2003, 07:58:59 AM »

RTFM!!!

"Terrorists, Rebels, and Freedom Fighters"
Page 201, Appendix A, Glossary and Terms.

When the leader has a military title... they become "rebels"... not "terrorist"...

when they are fighting a communist governement they are "Freedom Fighters"

It's all there in the Glossary.

"Recent intelligence reports point to Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, the Iraqi military's former northern regional commander, as the key figure behind the attacks, possibly with help from Iraqi regime loyalists and "foreign fighters," according to officials. "

I'd loan you my book, but I've already given to someone else... forget his name... Ben Osama... or something like that.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #3 on:** October 30, 2003, 08:02:39 AM »

More left wing bias as usual.

miko2d · « **Reply #4 on:** October 30, 2003, 08:21:29 AM »

muckmaw: HUH? Don't you need a formal government to have a rebellion?

Sure they do - ours. Who do you think they rebelled against? They want to seccede from US which is clearly illegal.

Yahoo is trying to paint the terrorists as a more organized force.

Why are you so worried about that? What does organised/unorganised has to do with good/evil?

Vermillion: ...rather than the terrorist scum they are

I though "terrorists" were those attacking civilians, not military convoys.

miko

majic · « **Reply #5 on:** October 30, 2003, 08:24:57 AM »

I've got a couple names for them, but the language filter... well, you understand.

john9001 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 30, 2003, 09:51:38 AM »

DmdNexus, what does your glossery call people who murder Red Cross/Red Crescent workers?

muckmaw · « **Reply #7 on:** October 30, 2003, 09:52:44 AM »

Hmmmm...

I've got them here as..."Murderers"

Ripsnort · « **Reply #8 on:** October 30, 2003, 10:05:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
I believe there are more than one group of Iraqis (and possibly foreigners) fighting in Iraq. Some are resistance fighters fighting the US military while others are full out terrorists attacking any foreign or non-Islamic influence in Iraq.

So how do the reporters tell them apart?

DmdNexus · « **Reply #9 on:** October 30, 2003, 10:26:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
DmdNexus, what does your glossery call people who murder Red Cross/Red Crescent workers?

Islamic extremist.

Hortlund · « **Reply #10 on:** October 30, 2003, 10:51:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
DmdNexus, what does your glossery call people who murder Red Cross/Red Crescent workers?

Moslems

cpxxx · « **Reply #11 on:** October 30, 2003, 11:00:07 AM »

There I've re-written to your taste:

Terrorist Murderers and Traitors Attack; Cowardly Int'l Groups Bolt Baghdad
18 minutes ago

By SLOBODAN LEKIC, Associated Press Writer and Commie

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Terrorist murderers blasted a freight train carrying vital aid, west of Baghdad and exploded a bomb near a convoy in a northern city, injuring a U.S. soldier, on Thursday as international organizations continued their exodus from Iraq

Yes you are being oversensitive. The rule of thumb in all these conflicts is that if they're not on your side and not an actual army then your propaganda calls them terrorists. Doesn't matter what war or when.

If you're a neutral or on their side you can call them what you like. Guerillas, insurgents tend to attack military and infrastructure targets. So attacks on military convoys and railways etc constitutes guerilla warfare. Essentially low intensity warfare.

Terrorists attack undefended civilian targets and soft targets. Rec Cross compounds etc. This causes terror not surprisingly and creates an athmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

Needless to say there is considerable blurring at the edges between the two.

I read that report as a simple description of several events. You and others read it as another example of left wing media bias. This is all absurdly paranoid. Just because the war hasn't gone perfectly to your taste and some Iraqis, misguided or not object to having foreigners controlling their country and are prepared to fight and die for this you get upset at the bad news coming out of the country. The truth of the matter is that this was never going to be easy. You cannot invade another country no matter how noble the reason and expect the everyone to shower you with flowers and kisses. History teaches us that.

miko2d · « **Reply #12 on:** October 30, 2003, 11:14:47 AM »

cpxxx: Terrorists attack undefended civilian targets and soft targets. Rec Cross compounds etc. This causes terror not surprisingly and creates an athmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

So do the actions of common criminals and they are not called "terrorists". Terrorists have a political purpose.
Insurgents rise in revolt against established government authority - which is not the case in Iraq, since US is not an established authority there but technically an usurper of power.

Guerillas may have no political purpose beyong evicting an occupying force. They do not necessrily have to attack only military targets but also the supporting infrastructure of the enemy.

miko

cpxxx · « **Reply #13 on:** October 30, 2003, 11:37:11 AM »

That clarifies it Miko, on the point of criminals and terrorists using similar methods with different aims. It is noticeable that many of the terrorists in this country moved seamlessly into criminality, similar methods, different aims. Even working with their former enemies for profit for themselves. No surprise that.

As someone said before somewhere, 'It's difficult to define terrorism but you know it when you see it'.

Animal · « **Reply #14 on:** October 30, 2003, 11:40:16 AM »

Quote

Rebel
re·bel Pronunciation Key (r-bl)
intr.v. re·belled, re·bel·ling, re·bels

1. To refuse allegiance to and oppose by force an established government or ruling authority.
2. To resist or defy an authority or a generally accepted convention.

But in todays world the only distinction between a rebel and a terrorist is which side you are on.