Penguin |
08-09-11 04:53 AM |
Why not use tactical nukes on the protestors? :-?
I know some of you mean it as a joke. Well, it ain't.
You know that there are some measurements the police can take between standing around and doing nothing and firing at your own people? Historical speaking it has been a great success for the British to use this method in Boston, eh?
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Has been, is and will always be true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danlisa
(Post 1723939)
This situation was always going happen. There's only so much that can be taken away from people before they start to rise up in protest. Saw this coming years ago.
Unfortunately, there's no recourse for anyone to follow to appease this.
The most I see happening is a curfew in major cities.
While I don't agree with the violence, burning and general terror being brought down by the participants, I do agree and support their reasons. This countries government will do well to remember where the true 'power' resides in this country.
Some yank once said "..that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing..."
|
I agree when we would talk about social protests. I see it only indirect as ones. Yes, many people who riot atm get the short end of the stick. However, looters are just plain thieves, nothing cool about stealing from people who try to make a little living. Burning down your own houses, homes of others, little shops is no protest, just plain idiocy.
Now if they would riot in the bank district and light some banks... :smug: But in this case, you would "surpisingly" suddenly see massive police intervention...
|