NationStates Jolt Archive

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.

Now...

If you have a machine that lets you see into the future, does it let you know whether or not your resistance will have any real effect?

I'd resist the only super competent national is a dead one *burns cookie rainbow flag of happiness*

Now...

If you have a machine that lets you see into the future, does it let you know whether or not your resistance will have any real effect?
Err... let's say the machine explodes after you use it. If you prefer, say that yes, resistance will be successful, but it will be bloody and wreck the country, unsurprisingly.

no, i probably wouldn't resist, i'm a coward. i would flee, and when the war is over i would come back if it's better.

Is this about Iraq?

If you ask me, anyone idiotic enough to think my life will be improved by bombing the fuck out of my community, deserves every kind of resistence I can possibly throw at them. Doesn't even matter if the resistance is effective, it's simply so fucking far beyond what I can possibly accept, that resistance in any & all forms is the only justifiable response.

Hamilay are you American by any chance?

If i would know that things would be better, why would i resist?

It does however suck that we can't see into the future in the real world,
where we have a chance of getting fucked no matter what we do.

EDIT: so in the real world i would probably resist for the sake of resistance.

Is this about Iraq?

If you ask me, anyone idiotic enough to think my life will be improved by bombing the fuck out of my community, deserves every kind of resistence I can possibly throw at them. Doesn't even matter if the resistance is effective, it's simply so fucking far beyond what I can possibly accept, that resistance in any & all forms is the only justifiable response.

Hamilay are you American by any chance?
Buh? Ooh, I didn't actually think of Iraq when I wrote this. No, I'm not American, Australian. Of course, Saddam was a dictator, so there wasn't that choice, but in this scenario say that if the people give up, since most of us here are from democracies the government will probably collapse too, the Norwegian hordes absorbing your country peacefully.

This (http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=207)is Iraq, in a nutshell. :D

Err... let's say the machine explodes after you use it. If you prefer, say that yes, resistance will be successful, but it will be bloody and wreck the country, unsurprisingly.

In that case, I'm probably dead due to the explosion, and will content myself with haunting the next umpteen generations of nation X's head of government.

it depends, do the invaders use Firefox? :)

it depends, do the invaders use Firefox? :)
Sure, whatever floats your boat, although they do burn Macs.

Buh? Ooh, I didn't actually think of Iraq when I wrote this. No, I'm not American, Australian. Of course, Saddam was a dictator, so there wasn't that choice, but in this scenario say that if the people give up, since most of us here are from democracies the government will probably collapse too, the Norwegian hordes absorbing your country peacefully.Ah, ok. It's just that any kind of liberating that involves 'liberating' people of their lives, seems pretty cracked to me.

In your scenario, if it involves force or the threat of force, I'd resist. My life isn't improved by stripping me of my freedom. It's that simple.

If there's no force or threat of force involved, I wouldn't resist. Most likely I'd jump at the opportunity, but even if I didn't, I'd simply decline politely & continue doing my own thing.

This (http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=207)is Iraq, in a nutshell. :DHahaha

Sure, whatever floats your boat, although they do burn Macs.


That alone gets me to join their country.:D

I'd use the machine to invest in the stock market from the cayman islands, taking no part in the foreign invader issue.

I'd move to Amsterdam.

I would resist until the last breath of air is expelled from my lungs, and until my heart finally ceases to beat. And I would kill every son they sent to my country, and would not take prisoners, merely execute them all.


In the immortal words of Ho Chi Minh, "Kill them all. Then they will stop coming."

Sometimes, Resistance is Futile: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-_y1rEaK7g

:D

Nation states are parasitic organisations, I don't see why I should protect one or resist another based on some arbitrary cultural bias. I'd use the machine to see which nation would provide the best future for me and the people in my monkeysphere, if that's the 'liberator', then it looks like I'm going to be a collaborator.

Nation states are parasitic organisations, I don't see why I should protect one or resist another based on some arbitrary cultural bias. I'd use the machine to see which nation would provide the best future for me and the people in my monkeysphere, if that's the 'liberator', then it looks like I'm going to be a collaborator.

You could also look at it from an evolutionary point of view. The strongest and best survives so it is necessary for every citizen to defend their country regardless and allow nature to take it's course and allow the best to survive and grow.

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.

if they want more territory, there are better ways of getting it. say slowly insert their citizens into my country, have them slowy work their way into our government, then when they assume power, absorbe the country to the homeland, or create laws that would make my country more like the motherland. if done slowly enough and smoothly enough, everyone would think it was our plan after all, and anyone who tries to resist would be painted as fascists or Extremists and ridiculed by our citizens.

one country taken over without a battle.

You could also look at it from an evolutionary point of view. The strongest and best survives so it is necessary for every citizen to defend their country regardless and allow nature to take it's course and allow the best to survive and grow.Eh.. Social Darwinism?

It's bullshit. 'Fit' doesn't mean strongest or best, it means 'most likely to survive & successfully reproduce'. Strength & so on, has fuck all to do with it.

In fact, you can make a very sound argument for the exact opposite. Conflict-seeking people - and those that seek power, find conflict - are less likely to survive than peace-loving, spineless twits that just adapt to whatever circumstances they find themselves in. Thus the spineless twits are more likely to reproduce successfully, and will end up being dominant.

Being a brainless chickenshit, in your dystopic world, is what it's all about.

Hmm.. Maybe that happened already. Would explain quite a few things.

Eh.. Social Darwinism?

It's bullshit. 'Fit' doesn't mean strongest or best, it means 'most likely to survive & successfully reproduce'. Strength & so on, has fuck all to do with it.

In fact, you can make a very sound argument for the exact opposite. Conflict-seeking people - and those that seek power, find conflict - are less likely to survive than peace-loving, spineless twits that just adapt to whatever circumstances they find themselves in. Thus the spineless twits are more likely to reproduce successfully, and will end up being dominant.

Being a brainless chickenshit, in your dystopic world, is what it's all about.

Hmm.. Maybe that happened already. Would explain quite a few things.
I agree with you. In case you didn't notice this thread hasn't really been all that serious of one. Mabye you shouldn't jump to conclusions and be all hostile making yourself look like an asshole. I was just saying. BTW, countries don't reproduce.

I wouldn't resist no matter who was the occupier. Rather, I'd just work my way up in the new government and profit from it. It's better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven...

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.

Is this supposed to be a discussion about that BS in Iraq?

Is this supposed to be a discussion about that BS in Iraq?

Not necessarily. Read the older posts.

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.

What if your system of government had been a monarchy, and you were happy with it? What if the foreign invader was saying that you were not allowed to keep your system, even though you prefered it over one that might, hypothetically, generate a "better standard of living"? What if you were an intensely religious nation and believed that your God wanted only priests to rule, but 'democracy' was going to insure that no longer would be the case? What if you had not ASKED this invader to come in and revamp your whole way of life in the first place? What if you were peace loving and did not want to be conquered by a country bent on forcing its way onto your country? What if the conquering country were a big old bully (even if they were going to make nice after they had won) and you knew that the only way to stop such a bully from taking over the world was to stand up to it, and ask for help from other small countries who, alone, stood no hope of stopping the bully, but together could? What if all the noise the conquering country made about equal rights and better living was just a load of advertising tripe designed to make you give in so they could gain control of your natural resources? Would resistance be ok then?

You could also look at it from an evolutionary point of view. The strongest and best survives so it is necessary for every citizen to defend their country regardless and allow nature to take it's course and allow the best to survive and grow.

Then surely its just another selection method if my nation does not inspire me to fight for it.

Then surely its just another selection method if my nation does not inspire me to fight for it.

True.

No.

Yes.

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.


Its never that simple.

if they want more territory, there are better ways of getting it. say slowly insert their citizens into my country, have them slowy work their way into our government, then when they assume power, absorbe the country to the homeland, or create laws that would make my country more like the motherland. if done slowly enough and smoothly enough, everyone would think it was our plan after all, and anyone who tries to resist would be painted as fascists or Extremists and ridiculed by our citizens.

one country taken over without a battle.

Written so perfectly... Makes me think that the Mariachi music I here all the time feel like I'm in Mexico. Wait I am in Mexico ain't I. At least I'm told this was Mexico or is Mexico or was or is it? Oh well off to my favorite Mexican restaurant or is it American restaurant? Adios Amigos!

Something that I was thinking about. Many people say that they would fight a foreign invader if their country was attacked without good cause. What if this foreign invader was a liberal democracy that guaranteed a better standard of living when the war was over? Let's hypothetically say you have a machine that allows you to see into the future, and you know that if this country invaded and turned your country into one of its provinces life would be better for all- the economy, civil rights, etc would improve and also the citizens of the original country would be treated exactly the same as citizens of the invader. The country is basically invading because they want to get more territory. Also, they are dedicated to conquering your country, so resistance will cost many more casualties than surrender. Would you resist? Poll coming.
If I was better off by not resisting and my nation was better off, then I wouldn't resist.
If my nation was better off, but I wasn't, then I'd resist.

Which I think answers your question.

If I was better off by not resisting, but my nation wouldn't be - then I'd resist.

Written so perfectly... Makes me think that the Mariachi music I here all the time feel like I'm in Mexico. Wait I am in Mexico ain't I. At least I'm told this was Mexico or is Mexico or was or is it? Oh well off to my favorite Mexican restaurant or is it American restaurant? Adios Amigos!

give it time... :D

Everything depends on the situation. But basicaly when there is an invasion there has to be an inbalance of some sort. Also it is normal for people to resist something that they do not know or do not accept, even if it is better for them.

Also note, that when a country you live in is invaded there is one important asspect which can't be ignored. The Nation itself. If I were to be conquered I would simply loose my National identity, thus becoming an "additon" to country B. I would not bare that.

Wolverines! *detonates explosives*

Wolverines! *detonates explosives*

O yeah. I enjoyed that movie...ridiculous though the premise was.

eh?

I can appreciate that objectivity isn't always easy to find, but to presuppose that "liberal democracy" is the best form of government is just moronic.

I can appreciate that objectivity isn't always easy to find, but to presuppose that "liberal democracy" is the best form of government is just moronic.

As long as it gives me a good job, security and a luxurious or at least comfortable lifestyle, I don't really care who is in power.

After all, why die when the going's good?

I probably wouldn't care for the most part, as long as I got equal treatment, but if one of their soldiers so much as touched someone I cared about, then viva la revolution.

As long as it gives me a good job, security and a luxurious or at least comfortable lifestyle, I don't really care who is in power.

After all, why die when the going's good?

I didn't dispute that. Indeed, I quite agree. Much as getting vexed over politics is probably a civil duty, and quite fun, I should imagine I could live in any state provided I was comfortable.

Regardless of whether the invader was going to benefit me in particular and my country in general, I would resist. Why? Because by invading and taking over, they've taken away my choice and the choice of my fellow countrymen.

Sure, whatever floats your boat, although they do burn Macs.

Do they give free computer upgrades so I can upgrade to the next generation of dual-core Athlons with a PCI-express GPU?

Conquest for Liberalism?
What a fantastic idea!
Sure i'd fight it.