Wrong use of term "rebel"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

They can't even make headway with heavy NATO air support. They don't have the support of the Libyan people. The eventual winner is decided whether we like it or not. 24.159.24.36 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

24.159.24.36 (talk)17:31, 31 March 2011

"They don't have the support of the Libyan people." Eh? Where are you getting this from? I'm getting my news from PBS and Al Jazerra. Where are you getting your news from?

They can't make headway because Qaddafi's side still has heavy weapons and is able to afford foreign mercs, while the opposition is disorganized and only has small arms, some rockets, and some anti-aircraft guns on pickup trucks. (And I haven't seen much of the last in recent news reports.) If they could get organized, they might start making headway. I'm hoping they might be able to get the oil flowing again and buy some weapons on their own, but that's probably a pipe dream.

70.244.104.144 (talk)01:26, 1 April 2011
 

Just because the rebels don't look like they'll win doesn't mean they won't. The media calling them rebels constitutes bias IMHO.

Kayau (talk · contribs)09:52, 1 April 2011

I'm not sure why 'rebel' implies they will lose. They are rebelling against the status quo of the last ~40 years. That makes them rebels.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)12:22, 1 April 2011

It just sounds that way. People who lose are called 'rebels', while those who win are called 'revolutionaries'. You can't call Washington a rebel.

Kayau (talk · contribs)03:52, 3 April 2011

Why not? He was, after all.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)13:46, 3 April 2011

Because they just don't... :P There isn't a reason. :)

Kayau (talk · contribs)15:51, 3 April 2011

Ah, but that's kind of my point. We aren't 'them'.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)15:56, 3 April 2011

But since it's the way it is, rebels are associated with losers. HK sources mainly use 'opposition' instead of 'rebels'.

Kayau (talk · contribs)10:28, 4 April 2011

"I'm not sure why 'rebel' implies they will lose. They are rebelling against the status quo of the last ~40 years. That makes them rebels."

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)16:45, 4 April 2011

But 'rebels', in common usage, is used for those who lose. This implication is unrelated to the definition of the word itself.

Kayau (talk · contribs)02:48, 5 April 2011

I dispute that. Your examples, so far, have been in the past tense. The news is written in the present tense.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)06:26, 5 April 2011

Maybe, I guess.

Kayau (talk · contribs)11:42, 5 April 2011

A Rebel in my opinion is someone who rejects a generally accepted thing, protocol, principle etc, but the Lybian "rebels" are rejecting dictatorism. Just my opinion, we could go look in the Oxford dictionary for exact definition of the term "rebel". Nolween (talk) 11:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Nolween (talk)11:07, 19 April 2011