The Reign of Terror is Unjustified

The so called reign of terror was a period in post-revolutionary France from late 1793 (French Queen's death) to mid 1794 (Maximilien Robespierre's death)[1].This period is famous for its execution of the many thousands of people Pro pointed out. However, the French revolutionary government didn't kill these people for fun did they? They killed these people for being suspect coutner revolutionaries, those that sought to restore the monarchy. War of the First Coalition:[4] France was fighting a war against almost all of the great European powers (Austria, Prussia, Spain and Great Britain) only excluding Russia and the Ottomans. During 1793 - 1794, France fought on its own it had no allies aside from its client states[2]. As such the new republic was under great threat of being overthrown. The map above shows the dire situation of the republic, if you include the VAST colonies of Spain, Portugal and Britain, the situation seems even more dire for the French.The Desperate times called for desperate measures, all suspect counter revolutionaries had to be executed. When they were not executed, they fought against the republic, which Pro himself mentions: people who may have died battling the counter-revolutionariesThreat of Counter revolutionaries/Traitors:If these counter revolutionaries are going to be killing people in the name of dictatorship and betray their homeland in its most desperate hour, they must be dealt with. It is sad that they must be killed, but without that, it is certain that there would have been even more counter revolutionaries and even more civil war and cause the Austrians and British win the war. The result of that? even more thousands of deaths and perhaps a subjugation of France to the Coalition powers.The counter revolutionaries would rather see France defeated and subjugated by foreign powers than see it ruled by democracy, that is pure treason. "[Forgiveness] for the royalists, cry certain men, mercy for the villains! No! [Only] mercy for the innocent, mercy for the weak, mercy for the unfortunate, mercy for humanity." - Robespierre[3]Only those supporting the terrible rule of King Louis XVI, where millions of French lived in poverty while he squandered all the wealth for himself, were to be punished. No innocents were to be punished, surely that is reasonably justifiable.End ResultBut, even assuming THESE deaths were somehow justified (which they aren't), the ultimate outcome was for nothing. Napoleon was a dictator, EXACTLY what the people didn't wantPro's argument is that since Napoleon ultimately became dictator, the reign of terror is not justified. Then he further extends the timeline to say that the ancien regime, the old Bourbon monarchy returned to power. I could use this same argument and say that the ultimate result is that France is a democracy today whose principles of liberté, égalité, fraternité (liberty, equality, brotherhood) were based on the principles of the revolutionary period. Therefore, if we must talk about the end result, France is a free, secular democracy with free and fair elections.Pro has not proved any connection with the 'reign of terror' to the restoration of the Monarchy yet he draws parllels simply becaused 'it happened in the future'. If he can do that, I can extend the timeline a bit further to include the present republican France too.IN addition, on a related note, the Tribunal members had ABSOLUTE power.When your country is at war with the largest colonial powers of the world, you can't exactly be spending resources to hold elections can you? When a country is at war, governments have the right to take up emergency powers. Sure it makes the country a dictatorship, but as long as it has justified reasons, it is not a dissolution of democratic ideals. Even today, democracies and republics around the world give the ruling government emergency powers if they are under threat, and fighting half of the world is a huge threat which justifies the Tribunal member's recieving their emergency powers.Counter revolutionaries:I can't make huge rebuttals since my character space is running out. Its too lowPro says the counter revolutionaries are justified because: there was a draft that forced all men to sign and war against the other enemies of France.I dont see the logic here. So if they do not want to fight a war, why are they rebelling against their own country? Civil wars are wars too you know.Christianity and religion was deemed to be the "ancien regime", people took down churches and all those in churches' powerThe Catholic church was notorious for its corruption. Besides a secular republic cannot have one religion being too powerful.Sources:[1]http://quizlet.com...;[2]http://www.infoplease.com...;[3]http://www.historywiz.com...;[4]http://www.napoleonicsociety.com...;