Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rochester.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!wjh12!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ciaraldi From: ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP Newsgroups: net.comics Subject: Daredevil & the IRA Message-ID: <4784@rochester.UUCP> Date: Sun, 16-Dec-84 18:52:17 EST Article-I.D.: rocheste.4784 Posted: Sun Dec 16 18:52:17 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 18-Dec-84 07:13:01 EST Sender: ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept. Lines: 35 From: Mike CiaraldiThere was a line in the new DD where he refers to the IRA as "terrorists" and Glorianna says something like, "no, they're just people fighting for their homes however they can." That's as may be, but it has nothing to do with whether they are terrorists or not. Unless the definition has changed in the las few years, I have always been under the impression that "terrorism" is defined according to your methods, not your motives. A terrorist works by spreading terror, so as to demoralize his opponents or put pressure on them. Thus, terrorists such as the PLO and IRA do things like planting bombs in department stores, public busses, and other area where the explosion will kill and injure innocent people indiscriminately. This is totally separate from the question of their motivation. They might be doing this to subvert the government to facilitate a foreign takeover, or to support a local revolution, or a counter-revolution, or any of a number of reasons. If they go around attacking military bases and their opponents' soldiers, they might be guerillas (as many terrorists and non-terrorists are), but this would not make them terrorists because they are not indiscriminately attacking civilians. Comments? Mike Ciaraldi ciaraldi@rochester seismo!rochester!ciaraldi