CreateDebate


Debate Info

8
10
Yes No
Debate Score:18
Arguments:16
Total Votes:18
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (7)
 
 No (9)

Debate Creator

Thejackster(518) pic



Is this statement true?: "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter"

Yes

Side Score: 8
VS.

No

Side Score: 10
2 points

This is true. There are always two sides to a conflict. Not much more to say.

Side: Yes
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
1 point

Of course there are usually two sides to a conflict. But that does not mean one side is "good" and the other side is "bad".

Side: No
1 point

The statement is true but the facts rarely back it up, take for instance the "troubles" in Northern Ireland terrorist organisations like the IRA were supported by Catholics from places like America and Canada because they were perceived to be fighting against the tyranny of the British government but in reality they were bombing and shooting more civilivians a great many of whom were Irish than they were military targets, they were also involved in drugs and other criminal enterprises. The same can be said for a lot of other terrorist organisations.

Side: Yes

It is true. Even if there are alternate outcomes, at least there is definitely one example which proves the statement to be correct. - Religion is one example. One side opposes another side, and each side have a grown moral feud between them which makes them to think that "we are correct and their believes are rubbish." Obviously the statement is true. Although it's message can be observed in any situation. Create Debate is another example where two opposing sides argue for what they really thing is reasonable. "One mans dispute is another mans words of his wisdom"

Side: Yes
2 points

Terrorism, as I understand it, is an extreme variant of freedom fighting. Targeting innocents to make a point isn't the same as attacking the military, police or leaders of your opponent.

Side: No

Extreme and specific. WWII was not primarily composed of terrorists VS freedom fighters. The freedom fighters where uniformed for one. Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack. I would even say fort hood wasn't either.

Side: No

The statement can be true, but more often it is not.

The wording of the debate seems to be asking whether the statement is universally true, so I have to vote on the No side.

Side: No
maanderson(2) Disputed
1 point

Could you give an example of this not being true?

Seems to me it would be true in the majority, or not all instances.

Side: Yes
1 point

I don't believe anyone considers Ted Kaczynski a freedom fighter. Even in his own mind, he was fighting for freedom from technology, which is pretty far removed from the idea of a freedom fighter.

Religious individuals who have bombed abortion clinics aren't fighting for anyone's freedom either; not even the freedom of their own religious views.

I posit that it is extremely rare that acts we classify as terrorism can be considered legitimate forms of fighting for freedom, even by those who benefit from them.

Side: No