Are the terms 'freedom fighter' and 'terrorist' synonymous?

How would you define a terrorist?
How would you define a morally questionable freedom fighter?

That's what my studies want me to figure out.
Good luck with that eh?
I want your opinions because I'm deadlocked in a debate with one of my friends.

4385943

4385989

Would you argue that's terrorism or collateral damage?

4385943

Freedom Fighters and Terrorists ought to be on different sides of the gradient between benevolent amd malevolent.

Freedom fighters target military bases and personell.

Terrorists target the civilian population and infastructure.

Freedom fighters use lightning strikes.

Terrorists send in impressionable young men with bomb vests.

In practice, they all fight for their version of freedom yet use terror tactics to do it. What a mess.

4385943 They both fight for what they think is freedom, but one eventually turns into a bloodthirsty fanatic. Extremism is its own special brand of person, and can be made of, but is not exclusive to, freedom fighters. Likewise, not all freedom fighters take drastic measures.

4386006

Both.

It's based on yours, theirs and my perception of what you, they and I believe what is good and bad for ourselves, the people around us and by extension the groups we feel affiliated to because of ethnic backgrounds, familiar ties and/or history, nationality, faith, beliefs, ect.

We all want to believe there is some sort of universal definition of "good" and "evil". Sometimes that's one person's way of finding out if they're right or not.

Makes me think of this trope. Heck, for all we know they're beliefs are like this.

I'm not claiming I'm right, just what I think and feel the question stems from.

4385943 Sometimes yes. Both fight for what they believe is right, but the difference to me is that terrorists purposefully attack innocent civilians, while freedom fighters should know better.

4385943
Freedom fighters usually come from oppressed or marginalized groups that have been deprived of something important, such as a homeland, and their struggle is to obtain it or gain it back. But while they may sometimes do some bad things in the name of their cause, their goal is usually acquiring or re-acquiring something valuable, something highly desired. This may be land, sovereignty, or political goals such as liberty or economic equality.

On the other hand, terrorists are less concerned with acquisition than they are with destruction. They are usually clever enough to cloak their motives by hijacking the popular will of an oppressed people, but their wrath is not appeased when they acquire what they say they want. For example, would the war against Israel be over once the Palestinians got their own homeland? Most likely it would not. The real goal of terrorist groups is not acquiring but destroying. Terrorism is thus qualitatively different from armed movement for freedom and liberty.

4385943 a freedom fighter would try to keep innocent deaths to a minimum, terrorist use the fear to get there response. When a freedom fighter uses extremeism and loses concern for the damage then it's reasonable to call them terrorist.