Guerrilla warfare poll

[Ocean11 0]

A friend hints that they are going to launch a guerrilla attack on a local US military base

[sunrise 0]

Are you thinking of doing that?

[Ocean11 0]

I don't have a local US military base to attack...

[jared 0]

so are you talking a silly mock attack with flour bombes to cause a stir, or are you talking real killing?

[2pints-mate 0]

Do you still have those hidden WMDs with you over there?

[kintaro 0]

Completely fking lame. Oh, is this some more of your always entertaining satire Ocey babe? I think the cheese has slipped off your moldy cracker, again.

[damian 0]

Kintaro, you made me laugh (no sides being taken here, it was just funny).

 

Based on zero context information provided, I voted for inform the police.

 

On a totally unrelated topic:

 

When is a terrorist attack not a terrorist attack? When it is highly probable that it was perpetrated by a white Australian Christian against a Muslim country's embassy.

 

 Quote:

Prime Minister John Howard stopped short of calling it an act of terrorism, but said it was a reckless crime

http://seven.com.au/news/topstories/84665

[Ocean11 0]

It's a serious question.

 

With US bases spread all over the world in countries where the US has absolutely no legitimate interest, it's obvious that at some stage people in those countries are going to wake up to the fact that they've been invaded. We hear about terrorism and freedom and all that, and I'm just curious to know if anybody has much real sympathy with this obvious propaganda.

 

While polls on here clearly aren't scientific, I'd be grateful if you'd try to give a genuine answer, whichever it might be.

 

Kintaro, you have some of the jerkiest knees I've ever seen. You made me laugh too, because I knew you'd have to post something angry but content-free. But I still hope to get something interesting from people with working brains.

[miteyak 0]

I voted 'do nothing' due to lack of information. If I thought my friend was serious, and any attack would involve injury or death, I'd try to stop it. Not because I condone U.S. bases abroad, but because I abhor the use of violence, and prefer to stand by the 'rule of law' premise, despite it's rampant abuse internationally by the powerful.

 

In an ideal world, I might report someone just based on a strong suspicion (ie in the context here), but given the irrational, illegal behaviour exibited by the ruling elites at present,a greater evil against the rule of law would likely be perpetrated against 'my friend' if he/she was even considered a threat.

[NoFakie 45]

As for the present conundrum, if it's a "ploughshares" type operation like the British women who attacked that factory producing Hawk fighter-bombers destined for bombing the East Timorese, that would be morally acceptable. The British courts even sided with those women. Local here means Japanese though, and there's no way the Japanese courts would be as sympathetic.

 

Done badly, individual direct action may do little more than create martyrs and provide an excuse for increased repression. If you could arouse a sufficient crowd and confront a base with a critical mass, however, that would be unstoppable. With enough people, it wouldn't have to be violent, though I imagine it almost certainly would be. Crowd control measures usually involve violence, and things soon get out of hand.

 

As for the "what is terrorism" question, if you are a US citizen and firebomb an abortion clinic in the USA, it doesn't qualify as "terrorism" under current US law. The precedent is there, in case you don't believe me.