Well, I think the assumption that terror must have been a part of Contra strategy and tactics is a result of the very successful pro-Sandinista PSYOP directed at European and North American audiences. The communists were very successful in their efforts to vilify the Nicaraguan anti-communist resistance.

As I said, I never went into Nicaragua with the Contras, but based on my conversations with them in their camps along the border, I would be surprised if terrorism was a delberate part of their operations. In those border camps I met Contras who were true guerrillas, and the defining characteristic for that group is dependence on popular support. These "true G's" understood the critical importance of winning the support of the people in their areas. Also, it must be remembered that the contras themselves all came out of the areas in which they fought. They were operating on home turf. These factors argue against the idea that terrorism was a part of their plans.

The Contras do not get enough credit or attention. They were the largest popular uprising in Latin America since Emiliano Zapata. I sometimes think racism and condescension towards Latinos (especially poor rural Latinos) is why the Contras never got the attention or respect they deserved (both during the war and now).

As for terrorism, many of the academics who pilloried the Contras during the war underwent post-conflict conversions -- they came to realize that the real terrorists in that conflict were the Sandinistas, the darlings of the European and American left. Better late than never...