The difference between freedom fighters and terrorists

Aggressor	Target	Motivation	Label	Example(s)
			War	Pearl Harbor
			War (if you win), War crime (if you lose)	Dresden
			Guerilla	9/11 pentagon
			Terrorism	9/11 twin towers
			Crime

Visualization of this comment.

Original text

ninti 247 points 12 hours ago[-] (314|66)
No, that was a war crime. Here is, according to at least some laws, the distinction. There are 3 factors:
The target: government or civilian
The aggressor: government or civilian.
The motivation: political or other. 
And the government can never have a motivation other than political. So with that, here are our options:
If the aggressor is goverment and the target is government, it's war.
If the aggressor is goverment and the target is civilian, it's a war crime.
If the aggressor is civilian, the motivation is political and the target is government, it's guerrilla fighting 
 (or rebels, or civil resistance, or freedom fighters, or revolutionary depending on which side you are on).
 If the aggressor is civilian, the motivation is political and the target is civilian, it's terrorism.
 If the aggressor is civilian and the motivation is not political, regardless of the target, it's just a crime.

So, Hiroshima is not terrorism: it's a war crime.
People blowing up U.S. humvees in Iraq: guerrilla fighting
People blowing up a Mosque in Iraq: terrorism
9/11 twin towers: terrorism
9/11 pentagon: guerrilla fighting

A Previous Diagram

from a post made 2 years ago

Sun Apr 11 17:19:25 EDT 2010