guns & purses (was Re: guns & crime)

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Wed Oct 18 09:54:41 PDT 2000


At 08:27 AM 10/18/00 -0400, Matt Cramer wrote:
>
>And there's no way a few militia types would be able to, say, cripple a US
>Destroyer, right?
>
>Revolutionary wars in the 20th century are not fought on the traditional
>battlefield. If Osama Bin Laden didn't exist the US would have invented
>him. I'm always amazed at how easily people adapt the terrorist meme.
>What's the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter, anyway?

To wage this kind of war, people must be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice, but even that does not guaranteer the results - Japan's kamikaze being a case in point. Todays wars are wars of attrition, he who can withstand greater damage wins.

BTW - I do not understand why people on this list succumb to the cowardly propaganda of US government and call blowing up the USS Cole "terrorism." Attacking a military target is an act of war - an a heroic one on the top of it, since it required ultimate personal sacrifice and minimized collateral damage. An act of terrorism is attacking noncombatant civilian population to terrorize it.

Apparently, in the US government newspeak, 'terrorism' denotes using force without prior authorization of the "legitimate" ruling class.

wojtek



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list