As many of you have heard, there is a common saying, incredibly misused, that 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.' I know that many on the right look at that as laughable moral equivalence. However, in many senses, that quotations has relevance. And so, what exactly does that mean? When is terrorism ever justified? Is it ever justified? And does that mean that the Islamofascists are fighting a just war, simply using the resources at their disposal?
My answer is that terrorism COULD be justified...under very limited circumstances. The cause must be THAT GREAT. An example of justified terrorism was when my grandma's friend's husband committed acts of terror against the local Polish population in order to save 1200 Jews during the Holocaust. In that instance, the ends of saving Jews was a noble cause. The Jews were being systematically slaughtered, and the Polish were helping in the genocide. Tevia Bielski did what he had to do to save the number of Jews he helped save.
A more controversial example of possibly justified terrorism was when the American patriots during the Revolutionary War terrorized the loyalists in order to win against the British troops. It is great that the US is independent of the UK, and it worked out in the end. But were the tactics justified? It's not as clear cut as the above example, because there was no genocide going on.
This brings me to the current Islamofascists. They use terrorism as a means to an end, and the justification they use for it is that they are only doing what they can to fight against an enemy with disproportionate weapons. But then we have to look at what the world would be like if they win. There would be no religious freedom (save for the surviving dhimmis), no freedom of thought, women's rights would be nonexistent, human rights would be a joke, and a brutal dictatorship would be in power. They claim that a benign form of an Islamic Caliphate would be in control, but there is no such benign Islamic government in the WORLD at the moment, and it is clear that they are only fooling themselves when they say such ludicrousness. In short, life would not be worth living if they win. Their cause is NOT worthy of their despicable tactics!
Moreover, one has to ask if in fact they are being treated so awfully, that jihad is their only option - basically, jihad or die. And the answer to that is also no. In fact, the only places where Muslims are being indiscriminately killed are in MUSLIM COUNTRIES! More Muslims have killed Muslims than anyone else.
Is this a cause worth fighting for? And is the evil the fact that it is terrorism? I would argue no. I would argue the evil is the fact that terrorism is being used for such a horrifying goal. We are NOT fighting a 'war on terror.' We are fighting a war against Islamofascism.
