this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
505 points (89.4% liked)

Not The Onion

12382 readers
1026 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

There is again difference between blowing up a strategic dam and attacking a concert full of civilians.

First can have some actual strategic importance, cutting out energy, interrupting travel, et cetera.

It causes terror and civilian causalities, but that is again, a byproduct. If the latter is greater than the former it doesn't add to the revolutionary goal, I would argue it damages it and causes more harm than good for the group.

Second is pure terror, it serves no purpose for the group, vilianizes them to the public and makes the government they are fighting against stronger.

Any action that doesn't help with a revolutionary goal or even detracts from it, is useless.

Any action with no strategic importance and only creating terror is not only evil, but harms the group more then it helps.

There is a massive difference between terrorism and freedom fighting.

I am not saying freedom fighting groups don't do terrorism, we dont live in a perfect world. What I am saying that terrorism has no benefits and only harms not only the innocent but also the group commiting it.

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

OK, with this I agree.

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Putting aside whether terror is strategic, taking hostages is a strategy.

[–] TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Killing houndreds of innocent unarmed civilians isn't

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you saying if one element of their response isn't strategic then it doesn't matter about the rest?

[–] TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nope, as I stated otherwise.

I am saying that non strategic acts harm the cause more than strategic help it.

Hamas does much more non strategic acts than strategic acts, to such an extent that calling them a freedom fighting group is objectively false.

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

Thanks for clarifying.