CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › If your country was invaded would you use guerilla tactics to defend it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If your country was invaded would you use guerilla tactics to defend it? - Page 2

post #51 of 62
3/26/03 at 6:10pm
thomas,
Good point on the non-combatant vs. combatant. I know what I meant, and it came out wrong.

And my point WAS that WAR WOULD be worse. S&A is terrorism. But I am not saying it's wrong. It's INTENTIONS are what separate it from other acts of terrorism.

Thanks for the clarification,
Chuck
Reply
post #52 of 62
3/26/03 at 6:15pm
Quote:
First Class 782:
Good point on the non-combatant vs. combatant. I know what I meant, and it came out wrong.

And my point WAS that WAR WOULD be worse. S&A is terrorism. But I am not saying it's wrong. It's INTENTIONS are what separate it from other acts of terrorism.
Fair enough. I kind of figured that was the case, but I wanted to go off on a rant about how dangerous it is to try and corrupt the meaning of words. Mayhaps I was channeling an English teacher.

Mayhaps.. hmm, maybe I'm channeling Mother Abigale, too...
Reply
post #53 of 62
3/26/03 at 6:23pm
Quote:
Devin hates Saddam, hates the war:
Total hypothetical. A Red Dawn scenario. Would you use guerilla warfare and "deception" tactics to retaliate against a better armed and trained force invading your home country?
Not only would I, but my friends and I are so crazy we'd probably get a kick out of it for at least a couple weeks. God help the fools who try to move it up on my swass. We've already got a gas mask, and "supposedly" this dude I know has access to Chinese made AK-47's. A former Navy guy I play cards with almost went down to check it out, but then realised he might have some trouble explaining why he shot a home intruder with not just an assault shot-gun, but a Chinese AK-47, too.
Reply
post #54 of 62
3/26/03 at 9:48pm
I would definitely defend the US, but I wouldn't resort to human shields and some of the other unsavory things the Iraqi forces are doing.
Reply
post #55 of 62
3/26/03 at 9:53pm
Quote:
Nick Luskmonster:
Quote:
Devin hates Saddam, hates the war:
Total hypothetical. A Red Dawn scenario. Would you use guerilla warfare and "deception" tactics to retaliate against a better armed and trained force invading your home country?
Not only would I, but my friends and I are so crazy we'd probably get a kick out of it for at least a couple weeks. God help the fools who try to move it up on my swass. We've already got a gas mask, and "supposedly" this dude I know has access to Chinese made AK-47's. A former Navy guy I play cards with almost went down to check it out, but then realised he might have some trouble explaining why he shot a home intruder with not just an assault shot-gun, but a Chinese AK-47, too.
I had a semi-auto version. Pretty good piece although the ammo available at the time was imported and of the corrosive variety. The vapors made your teeth feel like you'd just had a mouthful of fine grain sand.

It's one of those guns that you can drop in mud or sand and it'll still fire reliably as it's built off the Kalishnikov design.

But then there was my G-1...
Reply
post #56 of 62
3/26/03 at 9:58pm
Thread Starter 
Are people saying that INTENTIONS make some terrorism ok!??
Reply
post #57 of 62
3/26/03 at 10:07pm
Again, I would point to non-combatants. I have always said that terrorism directed at military targets is a legitimate use of force. I say that with the USS Cole and even the Pentagon on Sept. 11. However, when you deliberately target civilians, or use civilians as a shield for your actions, you have crossed the line.
Reply
post #58 of 62
3/26/03 at 10:18pm
You bet your ass I would. But the the diffenece is I'm a civilian. If Iraqi citizens do this, fine, I still think it's somewhat disgusting, but it's a viable tactic to remove an invader.

However, it's not valid for another military to do so, and that is what the Iraqi regime is doing. They are using civilians as true Human Shields (several Marines reported that military units were standing behind women and children today. They are dressing in American uniforms and EXECUTING there OWN people for surrendering. The word terrorism does not apply, but that doesn't make Iraqi military actions any less wrong.

And Devin, I haven't heard anyone say intentions make terrorism ok. At least, I hope not.
Reply
post #59 of 62
3/26/03 at 10:21pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
First Class 782:
S&A is terrorism. But I am not saying it's wrong. It's INTENTIONS are what separate it from other acts of terrorism.

Thanks for the clarification,
Chuck
Reply
post #60 of 62
3/26/03 at 10:48pm
Poor choice of wording, I think.

Terrorism is still terrorism, no matter what the intentions.

"Shock and awe" is not terrorism. It was a MILITARY campaign conducted against military and government targets in a time of war. The US gov't went out of its way (against military advice) to not hit targets in residential ares. If you consider this terrorism, then you consider ALL acts of war terrorism, no matter the justification.
Reply
post #61 of 62
3/26/03 at 10:59pm
I just realized what I said. Poor choice of wording on my part.

Terrorism is all about intentions. However, intentions don't make terrorism ok. That's what I meant.
Reply
post #62 of 62
3/26/03 at 11:29pm
I would defend myself and the people I care about but thats pretty much it. As for Iraqis using human shields, I am not sure we can trust the media right now. I have always felt that at least 20% of what you see on the news is bullshit, but now that theres a war on I'm thinking its up to 60%. There might be some truth to it but in my opinion this is probably being blown way out of proportion to try to justify this senseless bloodshed.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › If your country was invaded would you use guerilla tactics to defend it?