Imagine you are an Irish clan leader in Northern Ireland. You have witnessed the British Army kill six of your cousins, your youngest brother, and numerous members of your community. 

You decide to retaliate in an attempt to remove the British forces from Ireland. Initially, you target British military and/or members of the government with pipe bombs and random shootings - and are credited with many deaths. However, you discover that this does not bring about the desired consequences and so begin targeting random - innocent - British citizens and claim you will continue until your demands are met. 

 

When you initially target solders and government officials only...

• Can any of this killing be justified?
• Can you be considered to be "at war" with the British government or are you necessarily a "terrorist"?

When you begin targeting innocent British civilians...

• Can any of this killing be justified?
• Are you necessarily a "terrorist"?
• Should any action by any group that targets innocent civilians be considered terrorism?

 

When you initially target solders and government officials only...

• No, as long as I am killing soldiers or government officials who are not proven to have any involvement in the attack of my clan, murdering them by my own hands is injustice.
• In the eyes of the government, I am a terrorist, but in the eyes of others, I am "at war" with them. I am from the oppressed minority in my own homeland. I am doing what I can to protect it, for other Irishmen not to experience what I did.

When you begin targeting innocent British civilians...

• No, this is more unjust compared to killing random soldiers and government officials. They are innocent bystanders and have no hand in what was happening in the political and military sector.
• This is where I am considered a terrorist. They are innocent bystanders who should not be blamed for the death of my family.
• Terrorism can be defined as violence towards non-combatants, which include civilians, hence, yes. If a group attacks civilians and neutral organizations (such as Doctors Without Borders), they are going beyond their field of being politically motivated.

Step-by-step explanation

• As stated in the Hammurabi Code with "an eye for an eye", having my family taken from me by them, I should kill them or the proper compensation is kill their family too. Their families may have no hand in this but they indirectly agree to the ways of the soldiers who killed my family. But for other military personnel. it should be other hands who take their lives. I am in no place to take the opportunity from other victims to have their own way for revenge.
• Because I am going against the government, I am a "terrorist." This is the same case as Taliban (although I do not condone their practices as they also victimize civilians). But in my case, the British are going into my land, when British are centered into England compared to Ireland. In Ireland, where it counts, I am "at war" with them and I am trying to force them out of my country.

• These are innocent people. Killing random civilians, British or not, would make me lose my focus on to what advocacy I am pushing. This is similar to kidnapping journalists and beheading them in front of a camera if the government does not accept my demands. It seems like, if I target civilians more than the government officials at this point, the government will not listen to my pleas even more because I target non-influential people. But if the government shows that they would not care about the innocent, this might lead into a civil war within Ireland.
• I defined what terrorism is in the last answer above but that is basically why I will be considered a terrorist. If I advocate against the death of innocent lives through war (like what happened to my family), it would be hypocritical for me if I killed innocent lives too.
• Civilians may indirectly be supportive of the dominant rule, in this case, the British. Even so, their tax is most likely their only support to the British. The innocent people may have no choice but to support the dominant group. In order not to hurt anyone, they don't join the military or try to change the government on a systematic level. Some civilians do not simply care about the situation of the minority. It is better to target people who are abusing their power rather than the innocent. It is more ethical and more effective that way.