Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (147257)	5/16/2002 5:00:07 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1585051

There was a real army even if it was a somewhat ragtag and often disorginized bunch. By the end of the revolution it was getting larger and more organized. The Vietnames had a large conventional army. They did use it to attack American forces in Vietnam and eventually it was the conventional army that took over the South. But for much of the time, they didn't fight conventionally and that ended up being an important factor in bringing us down.........and the colonists didn't fight conventionally and that was an important factor in bringing the Brits down. Thirdly, you did accuse at least some of the colonists of committing terrorist acts... And some Americans today commit terrorist acts, but that doesn't make America a nation full of terrorists. Nor are the Palestinians a society of terrorists. Frequently if you have a lot of people in a violent situation some of them won't be too careful about who gets hurt and often they even diliberatly do nasty things to unthreatening innocent civilians. They are not following the policy they are criminals. The PLO, Hammas ,Hezbolah, Al-Qaida, the IRA and other groups have built up and trained terrorists as terrorists then planned and commited the attacks. Its 200 hundred+ years later......of course, the terrorist activities in this time are far more sophisticated and organized than they were back in colonial times. However, what you seem to intentionally or inadvertently overlook is that the motivations were, in some cases, very similar at least to the perpetrators. Whether you agree with them are not, the Hamas believe they are fighting the good fight just like the American colonists believed they were fighting the good fight. However, if you talk to the Brits of the time, their interpretation of the colonists were that they were savages [I am talking about the colonists and not the Indians] and the scum of the earth. Plus the Brits considered the colonists' fighting tactics to be rudimentary and barbaric by their own standards. American colonists showed the world a whole new way of fighting that didn't catch on fully until a hundred years had passed. In addition, to the Brits, our forefathers, in some ways, were the terrorists of the 18th century. And they did commit terrorist acts but they, the colonists, felt it was okay because they were the underdog and it was all for the good of the cause. And I suspect, rightly or wrongly, that's how many of the Hamas feel today. ted