There's always some blood but for the civilian population the optimal tactic is peaceful noncompliance.
Fiery yet mostly peaceful protests, as our friends at CNN would say.
Research how the Norwegians treated the Nazi occupation in WWII.
With guerilla warfare and sending mercenaries to surrounding fronts?
They get far less efficient when trying to fight sabotage on a million different levels of everyday life.
Sabotage, meaning acts of violence.
This is fifth generation information warfare,
The "fifth generation warfare" is a meme pushed through intelligence assets to trick you into believing that good old fashioned violence doesn't work. Couldn't be further from the truth in fact.
As I said before, I understand where you are and why you think these ridiculous things. It's only natural. The time has come, however, to cast off those mental shackles.
The Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cambodians, the Venezuelans, and so, so many others all understand just how pointless your ideal of peace is. Those who can use violence will do so to crush your pathetic "resolve." You fight back or you lose. It's really just that simple.
Nonviolent protest can work, if and only if the general population that was previously supporting the status quo has a strong sense of morals and sees common humanity in the protestors. The powerful know this, which is why they've spent a year making propaganda about how noncompliance makes you an unclean outcaste.
Nonviolent protest can work, if and only if the general population that was previously supporting the status quo has a strong sense of morals and sees common humanity in the protestors.
Wrong.
Nonviolent protest works if and only if there exists another allied faction to force the threat of violence.
Without violence you will simply be ignored because you have power.
Can you point to a single instance in all of human history where real charge was won without violence? It doesn't exist. Even in our modern gay times filled with bullshit "civil rights" initiatives, all their gains are at the tail end of terrorism campaigns.
The formation of the EU was neither a populist movement nor a real change of power. It was merely a consolidation of power by the nouveau nobility.
By their own account it came about as a reaction to the wars and violence from the previous few decades. Those wars gave the elite a justification for further power grabs.
Fiery yet mostly peaceful protests, as our friends at CNN would say.
With guerilla warfare and sending mercenaries to surrounding fronts?
Sabotage, meaning acts of violence.
The "fifth generation warfare" is a meme pushed through intelligence assets to trick you into believing that good old fashioned violence doesn't work. Couldn't be further from the truth in fact.
As I said before, I understand where you are and why you think these ridiculous things. It's only natural. The time has come, however, to cast off those mental shackles.
The Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cambodians, the Venezuelans, and so, so many others all understand just how pointless your ideal of peace is. Those who can use violence will do so to crush your pathetic "resolve." You fight back or you lose. It's really just that simple.
The strong live, the weak die.
Nonviolent protest can work, if and only if the general population that was previously supporting the status quo has a strong sense of morals and sees common humanity in the protestors. The powerful know this, which is why they've spent a year making propaganda about how noncompliance makes you an unclean outcaste.
Wrong.
Nonviolent protest works if and only if there exists another allied faction to force the threat of violence.
Without violence you will simply be ignored because you have power.
Can you point to a single instance in all of human history where real charge was won without violence? It doesn't exist. Even in our modern gay times filled with bullshit "civil rights" initiatives, all their gains are at the tail end of terrorism campaigns.
The formation of the EU was neither a populist movement nor a real change of power. It was merely a consolidation of power by the nouveau nobility.
By their own account it came about as a reaction to the wars and violence from the previous few decades. Those wars gave the elite a justification for further power grabs.