Would you participate?

[Hydra009]

Interestingly, the fact that this conversation is going on in a Christian forum is reason for concern. The CIA watches boards like these just like vultures waiting for stuff like this to fuel their totalitarian outlook on the "new America."

Paranoid, much?

If you wanted to really start a revolution just do it. Quit beating around the bush and take up arms against the American coup that has taken over Washington.

The OP is a "what if" situation. No one here is advocating violent revolution against the American government. We have an electoral system for a reason.

 

[Gaston]

Paranoid, much?

You're the guevara, you should start to ask yourself how far you're going to get while the people in power continue to strip Americans of their privacy and rights. You'll be the first to be "investigated" believe me.

The OP is a "what if" situation. No one here is advocating violent revolution against the American government. We have an electoral system for a reason.

LOL. An electoral system, eh? You mean the one that's designed to keep the public away from actual issues, focusing on character and charisma of the nominees instead?

Yep, great democratic system there, bud.

Gaston

 

[Chajara]

You're the guevara, you should start to ask yourself how far you're going to get while the people in power continue to strip Americans of their privacy and rights. You'll be the first to be "investigated" believe me.



LOL. An electoral system, eh? You mean the one that's designed to keep the public away from actual issues, focusing on character and charisma of the nominees instead?

Yep, great democratic system there, bud.

Gaston

We really need a tinfoil hat emoticon on this forum.

 

[Gaston]

We really need a tinfoil hat emoticon on this forum.

Was that a joke?

Do I come on here after you post and say that we "really need a dunce hat" emoticon?

No. Keep your editorial comments to yourself.


Gaston

 

[Hydra009]

You're the guevara, you should start to ask yourself how far you're going to get while the people in power continue to strip Americans of their privacy and rights. You'll be the first to be "investigated" believe me.

Read my profile. I've really got to get around to changing it sometime. It's an inside joke from another forum.

LOL. An electoral system, eh? You mean the one that's designed to keep the public away from actual issues, focusing on character and charisma of the nominees instead?

Yep, great democratic system there, bud.

Grrrr....

We really need a tinfoil hat emoticon on this forum.

It's currently in item form.

 

[Madcoil]

There's always time for tea.

 

[Eudaimonist]

If you wanted to really start a revolution just do it. Quit beating around the bush and take up arms against the American coup that has taken over Washington.

It isn't nearly time for that yet. While I'm not happy about the neocons in power, America is still largely a free country. For a while, anyway.

Anyway, I've already voted with my feet.

 

[chari.chari]

No, I'm way too wimpy to actually fight someone physically and the last time I got into a fistfight (third grade) I lost horribly. I think the most successful "revolutions" are fought with intellect and not violence, like Gandhi's nonviolent protests.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

No, I'm way too wimpy to actually fight someone physically and the last time I got into a fistfight (third grade) I lost horribly. I think the most successful "revolutions" are fought with intellect and not violence, like Gandhi's nonviolent protests.

In this situation, violence is the only action possible. The government rounds up and shoots anyone who even talks about resistance and writing letters is a sure way to get you and your family shot.

 

[Chajara]

Was that a joke?

Do I come on here after you post and say that we "really need a dunce hat" emoticon?

No. Keep your editorial comments to yourself.


Gaston

Touchy touchy. Yes it was a joke, so don't get your undies in a bundle.

 

[sanaa]

I don't believe that violence is ever the only alternative available so I don't accept the premise.
I never said anything about rolling over and doing nothing. Please re read my post.

am sorry i did not mean to imply that . if u do not accept the premise at all its a different ballgame .

 

[sanaa]

Gandhi and his people werent getting machine gunned in the streets[/font]

actually there have been cases like that ( read up on Jallianwala Bagh episode in Amritsar , India ) where peaceful protestors which included women and children were mercilessly gunned down by the britishers . the park and the well into which they jumped to escape the bullets still hold the bullet marks

 

[sanaa]

Liberal myth #1

Gandhi wasn't the only person in the whole of India you know, if it wasn't for the threat of armed revolution, the British government never would have left India.

i think the british left more for economic reasons but am from india and not to discount Gandhi or anythin but martyrs like Bhagat Singh , Subash Chandra Bose etc. were all armed revolutionaries and they made major contributions to the struggle too

 

[Antoninus Verus]

actually there have been cases like that ( read up on Jallianwala Bagh episode in Amritsar , India ) where peaceful protestors which included women and children were mercilessly gunned down by the britishers . the park and the well into which they jumped to escape the bullets still hold the bullet marks

True, but the british werent rounding up everyone who disagreed with them and shooting them

 

[sanaa]

True, but the british werent rounding up everyone who disagreed with them and shooting them

no they werent.i think Gandhi was a genius . when he was arrested for protesting he started a fast in the jail and he got real weak . the Britishers were afraid he would die inside the jail . if he died inside the jail under British care , there would be hell to answer in front of the indian public , if Gandhi died in that jail the whole country would pick up arms so they let him go becoz they couldnt take that risk .

Gandhi and his non violent methods were very effective . and he was a man who stayed true to his word . if even 1 british constable was killed he would call off the entire movement .
um sorry for rambling on, i get carried away when it comes to the indian freedom struggle

 

[Antoninus Verus]

no they werent.i think Gandhi was a genius . when he was arrested for protesting he started a fast in the jail and he got real weak . the Britishers were afraid he would die inside the jail . if he died inside the jail under British care , there would be hell to answer in front of the indian public , if Gandhi died in that jail the whole country would pick up arms so they let him go becoz they couldnt take that risk .

Gandhi and his non violent methods were very effective . and he was a man who stayed true to his word . if even 1 british constable was killed he would call off the entire movement .
um sorry for rambling on, i get carried away when it comes to the indian freedom struggle

The circumstance of the OT state that peaceful resistance is not possible. Peaceful demonstrations are met with machine guns and rifles with no concern for the death toll of civilians. Organizing a rally is a death sentence for the participants, a guarantee that government troops will show up, order everyone to disperse, then open fire on those who dont leave.

The question was "If the only option left is violent resistance, open warfare, would you fight?"

 

[Lifesaver]

The only occasion I would participate in an armed revolt against the authority is if the ruler is disregarding natural law to an extreme extent. Possibly what happened in Nazi Germany or in early and then Stalinist USSR.

 

[The Seeker]

no they werent.i think Gandhi was a genius . when he was arrested for protesting he started a fast in the jail and he got real weak . the Britishers were afraid he would die inside the jail . if he died inside the jail under British care , there would be hell to answer in front of the indian public , if Gandhi died in that jail the whole country would pick up arms so they let him go becoz they couldnt take that risk .

Gandhi and his non violent methods were very effective . and he was a man who stayed true to his word . if even 1 british constable was killed he would call off the entire movement .
um sorry for rambling on, i get carried away when it comes to the indian freedom struggle

I'm really not trying to be rude, but I think you're exagerating Gandhi's importance to an absurd level. He was one man. He did not have the power to "call off the entire movement" because the movement was that of ordinary people struggling against their oppressers. Furthermore, it was the threat of violence by many and not the peaceful actions of a few which truly frightened the British establishment.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

If you were presented with the opportunity to participate in an armed revolutionary movement, if it was for a just cause, would you participate

Say a ruthless dictator had taken control of your country. And you KNEW the only way to effect change was through revolution, armed revolution, would you participate? Bear in mind you could possibly take a job that didnt require you to kill anyone. But you would be aiding the group.

Would you participate, why or why not?

I would definately participate. Better to die on your feet than live on your face with a boot on your head.

You seem to be under the impression that it would be only the government that one would 'fight' against. That false premise would find many that are caught by surprise by the fact that there are also civillians that would likewise strike down a lawless attempt. And they don't have the uniforms or designated areas to make them the easier targets.
You see, that freedom and rights given by:

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

...works as a two way street. It isn't simply the ability to rebel, it is also the ability to squash a rebellion, lawlessness, crime, etc.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

You seem to be under the impression that it would be only the government that one would 'fight' against. That false premise would find many that are caught by surprise by the fact that there are also civillians that would likewise strike down a lawless attempt. And they don't have the uniforms or designated areas to make them the easier targets.
You see, that freedom and rights given by:

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

...works as a two way street. It isn't simply the ability to rebel, it is also the ability to squash a rebellion, lawlessness, crime, etc.

It is a natural assumption that there would be a percentage of civilians who would be accepting of an occupying force, even a brutal and totalitarian one. And it is also naturally assumed that such people would not be asked to join a revolutionary movement.