GreekChat.com Forums

GreekChat.com Forums (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)
-   News & Politics (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=207)
-   -   Were Confederate soldiers terrorists? (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=112828)

PiKA2001 04-11-2010 08:49 PM

Were Confederate soldiers terrorists?
 
I don't think you can compare the Confederate states to Islamic terrorism.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/1...ex.html?hpt=C2

moe.ron 04-11-2010 08:58 PM

Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. The rationale is irrelevant, it could be something benign like fighting for one independence, but if the tactic used is terrorism, it's the method is wrong, but not the aim.

Now, the KKK was definitely a terrorist organization. Their brutal tactic in spreading fear is a text book definition of what is a terrorist organization.

agzg 04-11-2010 09:22 PM

Ugh. This writer does not understand history nor military philosophy.

UofM-TKE 04-11-2010 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moe.ron (Post 1915846)
Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology.

Rick Santorum, the former Senator from Pennsylvania who is quite conservative, had this quote in 2006. "Some say we're fighting a war on terror. That's like saying World War II was a war on blitzkrieg. Terror, like blitzkrieg, is a tactic of war used by our enemy; it is not the enemy."

As far as the author of the story that the OP linked to, his argument is very weak. The 3 things that he says are common to the Confederacy and Bin Laden/Taliban are very general and are grievances that are common to many groups, e.g German occupied Holland.

To identify Confederate soldiers with Bin Laden, he had to find things that were unique to the 2 groups, which he didn't because he can't.

starang21 04-11-2010 10:36 PM

i wonder what the british thought of our "patriots."

cheerfulgreek 04-12-2010 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiKA2001 (Post 1915843)
I don't think you can compare the Confederate states to Islamic terrorism.

http://pushingboxes.typepad.com/phot...nd_oranges.jpg

PiKA2001 04-12-2010 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by starang21 (Post 1915882)
i wonder what the british thought of our "patriots."

I've read English texts that refer to our revolution as a rebellion.

DrPhil 04-12-2010 12:47 PM

THIS...IS...SPARTA!!!!!!!
 
I didn't read the article but have a general statement.

It's all about frame of reference. Such dynamics and hypocrisy go back to the beginning of time--centuries before America even existed.

A lot of things that are considered "patriotism" and "nationalism" by Americans are really just "terrorist" (or something else before terrorism was such an overused term) if viewed from a different lens.

The problem is that America is so used to being the HNIC (Head Nation In Charge) and imposing its power and influence (usually by force rather than charisma) on other nations. This is one reason why every instance of another nation imposing its power on America has gone down in history. Sept. 11 was horrific and still saddens and outrages me. But, I also can't say definitively that America has never done a version of that to another country REGARDLESS of the supposed reason behind doing it.

DrPhil 04-12-2010 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moe.ron (Post 1915846)
Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. The rationale is irrelevant, it could be something benign like fighting for one independence, but if the tactic used is terrorism, it's the method is wrong, but not the aim.

Now, the KKK was definitely a terrorist organization. Their brutal tactic in spreading fear is a text book definition of what is a terrorist organization.

I agree.

honeychile 04-12-2010 01:39 PM

When rebels win, it is a revolution. When rebels lose, it's a civil war.

I think the author is comparing oranges to apples. More Union soldiers fought in the Southlands than Confederates in the North. If you have to name a Confederate terrorist, it would be Moseby's Rangers, but when you consider Sherman, that's a stretch.

honeychile 04-12-2010 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 1915965)

*Whacking myself upside the head!*

Psi U MC Vito 04-12-2010 02:13 PM

Terrorism according to webster is
Quote:

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.
The CSA fought a defensive war for the most part. The Union attacked them in order to preserve the Union, not the other way around.

agzg 04-12-2010 02:15 PM

Sorry Vito, I love you to pieces, but I hate hate hate hate hate that definition of terrorism. This is why there are 800bajillion definitions - all of them are wrong.

But I agree with your point.

MUSK81 04-12-2010 04:00 PM

If Sherman's soldiers didn't engage in terrorist tactics, then I don't know who did! And I totally agree about the KKK ...

SusySorostitute 04-13-2010 12:32 AM

"Confederates for their involvement in the Civil War -- which was based on the desire to continue slavery" ...That's what the whole civil war was about?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.