Er... aren't you a big fan of Code Geass... where the good guys are terrorists?   It can be argued that terrorism is justified the terrorists are from a group of people being repressed and mistreated by a much larger, stronger orginization that would wipe them out in a fair fight.

Terroirsts don't JUST hit civilians, they often hit military targets too, much like the afore mentioned Code Geass.

Never could understand why terrorists think that killing innocent people will somehow get their demands met. While the reasons terrorists are angry may be sound, the methods they use are simply terrible.

Kinda reminds me of the beggining of Final Fantasy VII when Avalanche destroys the Macko generator. They wanted to save their planet, which was a good thing, but they didn't care that their methods implied killing innocent people.

It's not like you have to argue the anime.

However I mean, there are plenty of cases where terrorists are just a group of people that have been mistreated by a foreign controlling force.

Like say the Chechnyan Rebels.

On the otherhand, you could agree that it's way more effective then a direct confronation with a force way more powerful then you, yet still disagree that it's justfied.

Say there is a line between 'freedom fighters' and 'terrorists', and explain how the former has done net good in certain countries (possibly without civilian casualties, if you can find an example).

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

Blair, Bush, Brown and Obama are essentially terrorists as well. There conquest is deemed to be justified however because it will help to protect the involved nations.

It can be justified if it's for a noble cause, in which case it's freedom fighting, rather than terrorism (like Nelson Mandela).

It really depends on your definition of terrorism, so I would go with that: explaint that when it's justified, it's not terrorism.

Might I ask what is the definition of terrorism that you're working under?

Because very few definitions have I ever found satisfactory.

To be honest its all about perspective. I would suggest you broaden your scope beyond the current terrorist conflicts and take a wider more historical view of terrorism. Especially France, where the word was first used (I believe).

Maybe if the "terrorists" have a just cause (such as fighting for equality or sovereignty) and rely only on targeted assassinations of those in power rather than causing mass casualties among innocent civilians?

Just cite Star Wars, and how the rebellion are said to be terrorists to the empire, yet their cause is justified...

Ok, maybe not.