|
|
Post by Gabby on Sept 7, 2010 11:24:23 GMT
In fact, I don't think it holds true. A freedom fighter does not attack civilian targets. No freedom worth having comes from attacking civilians, not to mention the tactical idiocy of attacking those you seek to liberate, and those who could support you. Well that depends on the civilian and the extent to which they are complicit in the military-industrial complex doesn't it? At some level "I'm not carrying a gun, so ner!" isn't actually an excuse... Naturally. And I wouldn't entirely rule politicians and other elements of the state out of being targeted. Nor targeted attacks on elites, but it's a slippery slope. If you can blow up a tank, why not unarmed army recruits on their way to register for voting (contras did this in Nicaragua - not that they were freedom fighters in any conceivable sense of the phrase). If you can blow up a prime minister, why not an MP? If you can blow up an army base, why not shoot policemen? I do think the era of roving bands of freedom fighters is over in the North. With the overwhelming force of the state against them, what can they do apart from bomb civilians? Unless you're confident you can gather mass support, you're fucked anyway. 
|
|