Question about the 2nd amendment

Post Reply New Topic

General Patton in WWII noted that the duty of a soldier was not to die for his beliefs but to see to it that the opposition died for his. I am not criticizing your aims, merely your tactics. Once you're dead and out of the way you can do nothing for personal freedom. To oppose superior military force to guarantee your martyrdom is idiotic and naive and a theatrical demonstration, not of your will to win but merely that you have seen too many cowboy movies. There are better ways to fight for freedom.

Well you can't do anything to stop them if your a slave and theyr watching your every move, can you?

Read up on some social psychology there, buddy. Just one person willing to stand up against oppression against impossible odds will serve as an example and embolden others to do the same. When enough people stand up against evil, it will be defeated.

Also, how do practical concerns involve themselves in ethics and morals? You shoulod stand up for what is right because it is right, not because it is convenient or because you risk nothing in doing so. Enough sunshine soldiers and summer patriots. To quote a true patriot, Patrick Henry, "Is peace so sweet, or life so dear, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

Glad you're around. When you get splattered I'm sure lots of watched slaves will feel better.

I see you live in Finland. When the Soviets attacked your country in 1939, would it have been wiser for the Finnish people to accept Soviet rule rather than risk death in combat? Were the badly outnumbered and outgunned Finns fools for defending their homeland against superior force?

Now you're talking tactics. There was an organized army here not a few idiots with shotguns and pistols. If you want to organize a revolution you'd better have an army.