One Man's Terrorist Is Another Man's Freedom Fighter

[bhsup]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=154086

Figure out for yourselves whether he is a terrorist or not.

 

[emzie]

Yet you excuse and explain away his actions. And can't bring your self to admit the truth. I'm glad you can admire him. I don't admire any terrorist leader but that's just me.

What truth? That Mandela is not perfect? That he was part of an orgnization that used terrorism to further their goals? Yeah, I can admit that. I can also understand why they did it and why it became their best way to bring international attention and pressure on South Africa.

Frankly, in the situation of a 'homesteaded black guy' in South Africa, I would have supported the ANC. And I don't think for a second, that you in the same position, wouldn't at least passively support the overthrow of a very oppressive government.

No, I don't think he's a terrorist, nor ever was a terrorist.

 

[Elrohir]

What truth? That Mandela is not perfect? That he was part of an orgnization that used terrorism to further their goals? Yeah, I can admit that. I can also understand why they did it and why it became their best way to bring international attention and pressure on South Africa.

Frankly, in the situation of a 'homesteaded black guy' in South Africa, I would have supported the ANC. And I don't think for a second, that you in the same position, wouldn't at least passively support the overthrow of a very oppressive government.

No, I don't think he's a terrorist, nor ever was a terrorist.

If your definition of terrorist is based on whether or not you sympathize with their cause, then it's terribly flawed and is utterly useless, for all practical purposes.

I'm willing to admit that black South Africans had a very long list of legitimate grievances against the apartheid government. I'm willing to admit that in their circumstances, I might have done as they did. Even so, revolution was a legitimate option - terrorism was not.

Mandela was a member of a terrorist organization, and indeed, helped found it. Is he a threat anymore? No. But let's not sugarcoat the truth, and pretend that he wasn't a terrorist, when he quite clearly was.

 

[MobBoss]

wait, we judge him for using guerilla tactics...when the US did the exact same thing to win the revolutionary war?

Where did the USA kill a bunch of civilians during the war? Mandela admits to human rights violations.....where is the evidence of the same thing happening in the revolutionary war?

Guys...again...Mandela HIMSELF admits to human rights violations.

So stop trying to defend the guy. He did what he did and paid for it. And I am willing to bet he was sorry for what he did later on in life. Which is great. But it doesnt change what he did.

Bottom line, because if what he did it simply should be no surprise that his name was on the list.

Again, /big whoopee.

 

[amadeus]

And when did they start blowing people up?

Mandela was arrested before then; the South African police found a cache of arms in the MK's headquarters.

 

[brennan]

So Mandela never hurt anybody and had been in prison for several years when the movement he founded turned nasty, yes?

Not a terrorist.

MB: He admits to human rights violations by the ANC. That's not an admission of personal culpability.

 

[MobBoss]

So Mandela never hurt anybody and had been in prison for several years when the movement he founded turned nasty, yes?

Not a terrorist.

MB: He admits to human rights violations by the ANC. That's not an admission of personal culpability.

He was in charge of the MK - the militant arm of the ANC - precisely the group that did all this.

He planned and led what this group did. So who do you think is directly responsible?

Mandela of course.

And I think you are grasping at straws here. He led this wing in military operations. If you are so naive to think he didnt have anything to do with human rights violations you have no business even discussing the topic. Its like saying Yassir Arafat had nothing to do with what the PLO did - or that Osama Bin Ladin is utterly innocent because he has no personal culpability in AQ operations......./sheesh.

Granted Mandela is no where near as infamous as those two men, but lets be real here. He led a militant terrorist group that killed civilians. End of story.

 

[brennan]

I'm not going to see any credibility in these accusations until someone gives details of which terrorist acts were planned or perpetrated by Mandela.

He led this wing in military operations.

Did he? And since when are we considering 'military operations' to be terrorism?

Its like saying Yassir Arafat had nothing to do with what the PLO did - or that Osama Bin Ladin is utterly innocent because he has no personal culpability in AQ operations

You are having a laugh:

Mandela was languishing in prison, receiving one letter (censored) and one visitor every six months, kinda hard to run a terrorist organisation under restrictions like that, wouldn't you agree?

And very different to either Arafat or Osama's situations, wouldn't you agree?

 

[skadistic]

Did he? And since when are we considering 'military operations' to be terrorism?

When they blew up markets? Banks? Teachers? You know the non-military targets.

 

[brennan]

When they blew up markets? Banks? Teachers? You know the non-military targets.

How would those be 'military operations'? Sounds like terrorism to me, and can we give details of these operations Mandela was allegedly involved in...

 

[skadistic]

How would those be 'military operations'? Sounds like terrorism to me, and can we give details of these operations Mandela was allegedly involved in...

So a military can't do operations that are also terrorism?

You do realize that if the head of a military directs his military to attack a market or school or bank and those attacks are done by the military it is a military operation and a terrorist attack. Military can be terrorists too.

Preemption of intellectual dishonesty: no an errant jdam is not the same as planting a bomb in a fruit stand. That weak and desperate argument has already been tried and failed miserably.

 

[brennan]

See you appear to be adopting the sort of position I would espouse and you would tell me is utterly, obviously wrong, intellectually dishonest etc etc smiley smiley *froth*.

But anyway:

Did anyone have details of the terrorist acts Mandela was allegedly involved in?

 

[MobBoss]

I'm not going to see any credibility in these accusations until someone gives details of which terrorist acts were planned or perpetrated by Mandela.
Did he? And since when are we considering 'military operations' to be terrorism?
You are having a laugh:

Mandela was languishing in prison, receiving one letter (censored) and one visitor every six months, kinda hard to run a terrorist organisation under restrictions like that, wouldn't you agree?

And very different to either Arafat or Osama's situations, wouldn't you agree?

Brennan, I know you hold the title of terrorist apologist extrordinaire, but really.

The MK used what have become recognized terrorist methods in its attacks. Car bombs, bombs in trash cans, bombing bars and restaurants were modus operandi resulting in many civilian deaths. Madela himself plead guilty to 4 counts of such sabotage in his trial. Granted, he was indeed in jail during the MKs most significant bombings/attacks, but that doesnt change his role when the MK started on that road in 1960.

I make no claim as to what he did or did not do while in prison. But he was instrumental in forming and leading the MK in its creation and beginning and did participate in actions which would definitely be classified as terrorism today....at least 4 counts of it by his own admission.

 

[brennan]

That's a little vague; in Mandela's specific case, what sort of 'acts of sabotage' are we talking about?

 

[MobBoss]

That's a little vague; in Mandela's specific case, what sort of 'acts of sabotage' are we talking about?

I have been unable to find the exact details....but I dont expect it to be largely different than the rest of their planned attacks....because they do generally resemble terrorist attacks as we refer to them today.

Also, with him being the military leader of the MK prior to his imprisonment - he would also be responsible for acts by the organization in which he took no direct part - and those could possible be more than the 4 instances he plead guilty to.

 

[skadistic]

See you appear to be adopting the sort of position I would espouse and you would tell me is utterly, obviously wrong, intellectually dishonest etc etc smiley smiley *froth*.

But anyway:

Did anyone have details of the terrorist acts Mandela was allegedly involved in?

Where exactly is the froth? Why is when some points out you lack in you argument you stomp your feet and cry about froth?

What exactly do I appear to be adopting? I've alread had to deal with people in this thread who used words like seem and appear and they were wrong in their inference. Maybe you expand on what exactly it is you thing I'm trying to say. You can do that right? Since you know. Spell it out for me.

As for Mandela is a pass office a military target? Can you honestly say that attacking something similar like a passport office or motor vehicle office is a legit military target? How about a phone booth? Post office? Yup those attacks weren't on military targets and are terrorist attacks that happened while Mandela was in charge.

Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation) was launched by the leaders of the underground ANC and SACP, with Nelson Mandela as Commander in Chief, dedicated to a strategy of sabotaging targets of economic and political importance. Post offices, telephone booths, pass offices and electricity pylons were bombed.

http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/chronology/thisday/1961-12-16.htm