$hit hits the fan. How far will you go?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem I have with the IRAs methods is that they consistently target non-combatants, for instance blowing up shopping centers. The military and police are certainly legtimate targets, as are government leaders. But I draw the line at specificly targeting civilans. If you want it too look like a legit revolution, you must not fall into the "ends justify the means" trap, or you'll never reach the ends.
PK
 
PKN,

What you said sure sounds nice, but I don't think it reflects the reality of war. Did we defeat the Japanese in WWII by taking the "high road"? or by nuking two cities full of civilians? We also killed a whole lot of "innocents" in the Dresden bombings. Did Reagan win the Cold War for us by promising the Ruskies that we would only target military sites? or was the plan called "mutually assured distruction"? Did we win in Vietnam by "fighting fair"?

If one side is willing to kill women and babies to achieve their ends, how will the other side fight back if they aren't willing to do likewise? "Fighting fair" makes for a good movie hero, but I don't think it's the best way to win a war.

The best way IMHO to win a war is to let it be known that your side has not only the ability, but more importantly the WILL to do absolutely anything to win. When I say "WILL", I mean being willing to suffer great loss and also being willing to inflict tremendous pain.

The "limiting innocent casualties" style of fighting may let you win some battles, if you're lucky. But I don't think a war can be won that way.

JMHO
 
Closed at request of author

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top