From: "Geo." 

"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.

> 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.

> 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.


> 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.


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

a trial by peers.


> > 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.

Geo.

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