From: Adam Flinton 

Geo. wrote:
> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
> news:40daaf70{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>
>>>The number of people involved raises the chance of it involving you and
>
> yours.
>
>>>Are you worried about being injured because of the congo? No,
but turn that
>>>into a world war and are you worried?
>>>
>>
>>If in WW2 I had been say a Brazilian or Argentine farmer or a mexican
>>peasant or etc. etc. then no not at all. If you're talking about a
>>widescale nuclear exchange, then the "action" may
actually be taken by
>>only a very few people + a load of automated systems.
>
>
> bigger bombs involve more people.
>

9-11 involved airliners. Also the most rapid genocide so far (in Rwanda)
involved machetes & buildings full of people + fire.


>
>>It might affect a lot of people but be carried out by very few.
>
>
> 9/11 was carried out by very few but affected a lot of people. The deciding
> factor is not how many are behind it, it's how many are affected.
>

Thus by that measure & given global mass media (satellite + internet) +
24 hour news channels any act of pol violence which is widely reported
would thus be an act of war.

>
>>So hitting the pentagon & other symbols of US gov weren't? i.e. if the
>>other plane had managed to get to target & the congress or whitehouse
>>was now in the same state as the WTC but with few(er) casualties then
>>that wouldn't be an act of war?
>
>
> The pentagon maybe, but taking out congress might be viewed as a pro american
> action..
>
>
>>i.e. if the WTC had come down slowly (i.e. post evacuation of those who
>>could be evacutated) but the whitehouse had been totalled then that
>>would not have got your attention?
>
>
> Why don't you change that just a little, make it the statue of liberty
instead
> of the whitehouse. Killing the president might be considered an act of war,
> that's sort of a special case.
>

Ho hum. So was the Kennedy assassination an act of civil war?

>
>
>>Not to be picky but what do you think genocide means? Ethnic cleansing
>>is to move the population of your enemy out of a given area/ off a given
>>piece of land (dead or alive). A Nuke will do that.
>
>
> Genocide can be more of a political group than an ethnic group.
>

That's stretching somewhat.

>
>
>>To give an obviousl example what is the difference between a state
>>executioner & a serial killer?
>
>
> a trial by peers.
>

So it would be OK if it was a group of serial killers who "tried"
a victim according to rules & crimes they'd just made up?

>
>
>>>It is a civil war, it is different
>>>from terrorism in that it does not attempt to gain cooperation
thru terror
>
> but
>
>>>instead it is conquest by force.
>>
>>Absolutely incorrect. usually the majority don't want war period. You
>>gain their "cooperation" often via terror. It is a std
dictum of a civil
>>war that the main target is to terrorise those who don't support you
>>into supporting you.
>
>
> Huh? Explain that one to me in terms of the American Civil war.
>

Sherman.


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5