Terrorism is Sometimes Justified

Terrorism is a relative word. One thats meaning is determined by what side of the given issue you are on. The people we normally think of as terrorists oddly enough define themselves as freedom fighters, armies of the people, and patriots. To their opponents they are terrorists and barbarians. Regardless of who is or who is not a terrorist, is it ever justified? I will say that from our stand point as Americans it is difficult for us to answer that question. We have never faced the harsh environments which often cause the formation of terrorist groups. In Ireland for example, the people were suffering from poverty, exploitation from Britain, discriminatory laws, and a famine. Over hundreds of years these tension began to boil and rage. Eventually the IRA and other similar groups began to emerge in defense of these people. The IRA then began a near century of guerrilla warfare against Britain. I feel that given the circumstances of the parties involved it was completely justified. The people themselves lacked the ability through diplomats to bring about change. They lacked the field army to challenge Britain, they lacked the economy to challenge Britain. I will say that they use terrorism only as a tool in an evolutionary process to achieve their goals. They believed that this was the only way that they had forward to challenge the injustices. Looking at history I doubt very much that any meaningful change could have been brought about without the IRA's use of terror tactics. Now onto the current issue of terrorism. The Islamic jihadists who have mobilized and declared an Islamic call for jihad against the "west". Can we conclude that any of their tactics are justified? To you and I perhaps not, but for the people who are taking part in it, thats entirely different. Let me explain for I know many of you out there are wondering why/how I am going to justify their actions. Imagine yourself as a young Palestinian boy/girl. You are growing up in occupied Gaza. You suffer injustice nearly daily. Food is scarce, money, well your family has minimal. You are in a system that will inevitably lead to failure. You grow to harbor hatred for those who inflict this injustice and those who aid in it. Similar to the Irish they feel as though they have no outlets to pursue to achieve their goals. Given that there is no way to defend yourself/country through conventional military service what other options does he/she have? Many will point to Ghandi's peaceful campaign that won India its independence, but the circumstances where much different. India would have cost Britain huge amounts of money to maintain a presence and defend. The British had no lasting need (resources) from India. Israel's very existence comes through removal of Palestinians. One can see how that may lead to violent actions. Imagine being told your family no longer lives here, this is no longer your country. Palestinians have tried repeatedly to pursue a peaceful means. Obviously none of which brought about any lasting peace/change. When left with no other weapons to defend oneself, people can be justified in turning to arms, and terror tactics to bring about the change they desire. From a moral perspective obviously this causes some raised eyebrows. I am not going to attempt to defend attacks on innocent people through bus bombs or indiscriminate killings. I am talking about attacks on economic infrastructure, political figures, and government officials. Basically people who are in direct involvement with the struggle. In the case of Al-Queda they are not defending the freedom of their people of fighting against extreme injustice, they fight simply to fulfill religious goals. They are not confined to a single country or a single enemy, they fight against an ideology. They have legitimate means to stage a peaceful campaign. Terror tactics in that case are not justified. I'll leave it here and give you a chance to respond before going any further.