>Yea from the looks on the news the Israelis only strike in retaliation
>for a attack by terrorists.
>
>
>This is an interesting topic because it reminds me of the talks we have
>about right to bear arms etc. Now back in the day when we had our
>revolution we were all on the same tech level. British has better
>muskets but no tanks airplanes etc. So we were able to fight them off
>with the standard fire arms of the day. Now today we wouldn't be able to
You also must remember at this time the British were involved in a war with
the French, Germans and Spanish. All of whom were veyr eager to help the
revolutionaries, up to and including sending in troops and ships. For
instance the French sent in a couple of large fleets and took control of
the Chesapeake. They also sent in over 30,000 troops under Rochambaut. It
wasn't a matter of the poor colonists holding off the perfidious British
all by their lonesome. They had a lot of outside help.
>overthrow our government with standard household arms. We could kill
>solders but we couldn't take out a brigade of tanks or apaches etc.
>So I wonder would we have to resort to suicide attacks to make our
>point? I mean I try to put myself into the role of what if. But I
>couldn't see suicide attacks against civilians as being effective. Would
>we hope that by killing innocents the people will be so outraged they
>will say leave them and let them have what they want?
At the same time the Americans were doing something similar with expelling,
torturing and burning out the homes and lands of those loyal to the crown.
Along the frontier there were quite a few massacres of loyalist Indian
tribes. So the revolutionaries were not all that innocent.
larry
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
