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 Ciaraldi  

There 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