at what point would you use violence against the state?
- Thread starter bluestreak
- Start date
dylanredefined said:Difficult to acheive though if things have gone that bad leaders aren't going to do walk abouts.Dont know hopefully realise when the state has turned evil probably as a very minor cog wouldn't know though.
Yes, difficult, but the ira very nearly got thatcher...
And look, if they can knock down those two towers in new york, i reckon people can do almost anything with a good plan.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You could argue that. It's certainly fair to say that in some cases our "rights" have been established through the trading of one type of violence for another, more subtle type.DexterTCN said:
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
chymaera said:
Target infrastructure and you can limit the ability of the state to respond., so some "property destruction" would serve one's purpose.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
fela fan said:
Semi-demolishing an entire hotel is hardly "clinical", is it?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
true, but if the IRA had got thatch it would have ended with the same net result 9/11 did; huge wave of outraged reaction and lurch even more rightwardsfela fan said:
Red Jezza said:
Agreed. I think had Thatcher been killed and Tebbit lived he could well have been PM.
Even as it was I think the wave of outrage post Brighton was ultimately a contributing factor to the 2nd landslide of 1987. Had the 87 result been closer, Major may not have won in 1992. Pure speculation of course.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
chymaera said:
That depends entirely on the infrastructure you target.
rekil
to menny cranks
Naw, the brighton bomb was 3 years before the election, and unlike unemployment or inflation, I don't think the british public believed northern ireland to be much of an election issue at all. If Thatcher had been bagged, the whole thing would have been ratcheted up a notch but security measures taken in response, (more shooting on sight, broader use of the PTA and the like) might well have on balance worked in the IRA's favour.keicar said:Agreed. I think had Thatcher been killed and Tebbit lived he could well have been PM.
Even as it was I think the wave of outrage post Brighton was ultimately a contributing factor to the 2nd landslide of 1987. Had the 87 result been closer, Major may not have won in 1992. Pure speculation of course.
Red Jezza said:
So history will simply record a delay to that lurch rightwards...!
But what would the reaction have been if it wasn't the ira, but in fact someone unknown assailant who managed to knock off the pm, and in times when the state was being oppressive? A question perhaps more pertinent to this thread.
Similar threads
- Poll
