Google| Subject | Re: Republicanism still an offence in England? (wasRe: Queen mother (of |
| From | David Flood |
| Date | 2002-04-17 18:37 (2002-04-17 17:37) |
| Message-ID | <a9kbfk$3p5or$2@ID-121201.news.dfncis.de> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.tolkien |
| Follows | paulh |
| Followups | paulh (58m) > David Flood |
"paulh" <paulh@fahncahn.com>wrote in message news:bkarbugiku6547237gssi8aombgul2080r@4ax.com...
paulhyour
On 17 Apr 2002 16:50:00 GMT, Tamim <hallaril@hotmail.com>wrote:Tamim
paulh <paulh@fahncahn.com>wrote:paulh
What utter rubbish. Can you show me anywhere credible, other than in
or moreopinion, where terrorist forces are defined as those which only kill X%
then you'llof 'civilians' vs combatants..Tamim
There is no official definition.paulh
SO what ratio needs to be aspired to for THIS then? Perhaps if the Loyalist Paramilitaries kill more 'combatants'
You do realise that your definition includes the American (and French, and Russian, and Irish) revolutionaries, the ANC, the French Maquis, the East Timorese Fretilin and many, many others?paulhbe happy to take them off the list of 'Terrorists'.. What a pathetic excuse to justify terrorism..Tamim
Partly I have to side with Russ. Every army, when in war, kills it's own share of civilians.
Usually when wearing a uniform of some sort and belonging to some sort of recognised government. Sneaking around in civilian clothes kinda changes things....
D.
2002-04-17
