If your country was suddenly taken over by a dictator would you....

[germanos]

Originally posted by rah
Isn't that one of the reasons why the US has different branches in the military, to make it more difficult for a military junta?

Thats no gaurantee though. Many dictators just come from one branch. IIRC Pinochet was navy, while Assad of Syria was airforce.

But to the poll: I think the realistic answer would playing with my banana. Might get into subversive acts only wjen it is really to late and all power has been seized, or when the brurality of the regime would affect my personal life.

If by the time I have a family, the chances of me just trying to survive would increase I suppose.

[Provost Harrison]

If your country was suddenly taken over by a dictator would you....

...notice? Probably not. His Toniness speaks for the British people now

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Frogger
Cromwell was a worse dictator than poor old Charles ever was.

Charles was an enemy of his own people. That was the
charge that cost him his head.

I think Cromwell is much maliged and he did a good job, compare his rule vs the other revolutionary leaders
Lenin, Rosepierre, Napolean, Mao, etc. only Washington
and Gandhi beat him. (and Gandhi barely takes 2nd).

[Menlas]

Originally posted by SlowwHand



I can think of no dipomatic way to say it, sorry.
You'd make an excellent slut.

Even some of the wuss French have been known to resist.




I guess you and David can go in together and open a whore house.

Insulting and pointless. Yes sir, you are a perfect troll.

But after all, it only confirms what i thought about you.

[SlowwHand]

All I can say to that is, good.

[Dis]

sloww my post wasn't serious now.

I was wondering if someone would question my post and my thread about necessary evil where I advocate the use of force to keep this nation alive.

I can't support both non-violent ways and violent ways at the same time can I?

[SlowwHand]

Well, you freaked me out, Diss.
I thought, WTF??

David, maybe some others, but not The Diss.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ozz


Charles was an enemy of his own people. That was the
charge that cost him his head.

I think Cromwell is much maliged and he did a good job, compare his rule vs the other revolutionary leaders
Lenin, Rosepierre, Napolean, Mao, etc. only Washington
and Gandhi beat him. (and Gandhi barely takes 2nd).

Hah! Charles was knocked off the throne because of religion, and the fact that he had the gall to let Catholics live in peace.

Cromwell put a stop to that, he sure did.

And he ran Parliament with a much firmer hand than Charles ever dared to.

[Dis]

sometimes I wonder if I could get more chicks if I become a peacenik.

I wonder if anti-war rallies are a good place to meet women

[Ramo]

Hah! Charles was knocked off the throne because of religion, and the fact that he had the gall to let Catholics live in peace.

And Charles opposed bourgeois seizure of peasant land. The bastard!

[MattyBoy]

"If your country was suddenly taken over by a dictator would you.... "
I would call up George W and ask him to drop some bombs on me and my friends.

[Japher]

[Sava]

"Give me a rifle, put my anywhere up to and including a quarter mile away, with a clear line of site, back your bags gentlemen, war's over." --Pvt. Jackson from Saving Private Ryan... yet somehow relevant today

[Boris Godunov]

Speaking of being taken over by a dictator...Sava, are we gonna Civ?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Frogger




Cromwell was a worse dictator than poor old Charles ever was.

I was getting ready to say...anyone who thinks Cromwell did something good needs a serious reality check!