US Definition of "Subversion" within it's Dependencies

Discussion in 'Terrorism' started by Horhey, Sep 16, 2012.

  1. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I just bought this book by Amnesty International researcher, Michael McClintock which is volume 1 out of 4 or 5 of a massive study of US counter-insurgency/"low intensity warfare" doctrine. Right now Im on page 30..:shock:

     
  2. Alif Qadr

    Alif Qadr Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2012
    Messages:
    1,385
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have a question Horhey,
    How can people be an insurgent in their own homeland? For the life of me, I have mulled over this idea of labeling opposition forces who are fighting against foreign invasion, be it through actual warfare or through propaganda, teaching or other forms of resistance. It would stand to reason that the said foreign forces of various types are the actual insurgents.
     
  3. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In American imperial culture, the assumption is that the US owns the world so it's forces cant be foreign fighters by definition. Resisting US attack is also denounced as "aggression" or terrorism. Just as we were defending ourselves against aggression in Vietnam and so on. These are just the basic assumptions in mainstreem discussion.
     

Share This Page