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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: X Y Zebra who wrote (1887)	7/19/2005 9:47:56 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540724

there may be collateral damage as part of the dangers that war represent. When cluster bombs and napalm are used then collateral damage is the prime objective. let's not forget... we are at WAR You can't fight a war against a tactic. How would you know when you won or lost? TP

To: X Y Zebra who wrote (1887)	7/20/2005 8:00:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540724

if you are an insurgent genuinely attempting to gain some sort of liberty from an oppressor, you fight MILITARY targets and you fight a war aiming at such Not necessarily. If you had been unsuccessful fighting military targets or assess that you would be unsuccessful doing so and if you thought that terrorism might work or can't think of any alternative that might work, and you were sufficiently committed to your cause, you might use terrorism as a tactic. I think it could be considered by the desperate true believer as an appropriate choice. Not disagreeing with your overall perspective terrorists, just with this particular assertion.