If the people are fair, free and just it is a product of their choosing, by way of being free.
Yet if the people believe and act upon those beliefs, to some detriment to others, are they not also free to do so?
It stands to reason...
But if the people are slaves to a system, (for example,) and it is the system that is despicable, why not attack the system?
The people, (we assume,) are merely purveyors of the system, because they must. To refuse membership is to render one's self a failure. How can slaves be targets?
It isn't the ideas of freedom, democracy or even stupid capitalism that are the targets of anyone other than seeming tyrants or true brutes. Why wouldn't everyone want to be free, fair and affluent?
The things that make a target real are products of being slaves to a faulty system.
When one is greedy, one takes. When one is mighty, one takes what one wants. When one is both an unholy palindrome ensues.
Without learning to share, the glutton bully perishes.
This is to be expected.
This is natural.
So it is that those making decisions to send people to war based on pre-programmed ideals of earnest well being. That is to say, these (mostly) men from either side truly believe they are doing right.
These decision makers are thus slaves.
The Terrorists, as it were, are attacking drones and machines.
Not even fit to be slaves.
Robots of slaves.
However, if you're trading one life for another because one side wants oil and one side wants to be despotic, this is an incongrous dichotomy. Both sides are dupes, not just in the sand, but too in the marble hallways.
The real boss is the system, and the system is hungry.
Might is tenuous.