h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I was just thinking that its very often the case that when Governments declare "war" that its legitamised because its "official" whereas individuals who perform similar acts of violence are "terrorists" because they have no legitamcy whereas they may consider themselves freedom fighters.

I'm not in any way condoning either act because one thing I've learnt is that violence is nearly always the least successful way to settle a dispute. It only leads to more hatred Israel and Ireland being two obvious examples.

Taking the example of Nelson Mandela. He was a terrorist to the South African state in the 70s although no one these days would agree with that sentiment but would take the view he was a brave fighter for the cause of democracy. It seems to me that we are "informed" by our government and media of the day who are legitamate freedom fighters and who are terrorists.

If trying to decide who are terrorists and who are freedom fighters for oneself it does not become much easier. Most people would consider the French Resistance freedom fighters but they regularly attacked civilian targets - not only German civilians working for the government in the occupied zone but also French collaberators and people who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Many organisations routinely labelled by the West as terrorist iin the past now form part of recognised governments. The U.S. backed groups such as the Contras in Nicaragua who frequently used terrorist methods.