If America were invaded and occupied would you collaborate with the enemy

[NNN0LHI]

[dobak]

1. Yes, if it was Canada who invaded...

:-)

[maveric]

4. It would depend on the enemy.

Perhaps if it were the UN, then I might "help out" a bit.

[elfwitch]

35. I agree with you...

It would really depend on who it was.
If the UN or someone similar saw fit to put down the * cabal like the dogs they are... I'm not so sure I would resist arrest, if you know what I mean.

[Minstrel Boy]

14. Lieutenant, double this man's Molson rations!

We need patriots like you to help build the Great Southern Canadian Co-Prosperity Sphere.

:-)

[mzmolly]

32. My thoughts exactly...

:) Though I voted no.

[eyesroll]

2. Who's the enemy?

Do you mean, would we collaborate with Americans we traditionally consider our enemies in order to get the invaders out?
Or would we collaborate with the invaders?

[xultar]

3. Depends on why we were invaded...Let's say Shrub, Rummy,

Condi, KKKarl and their ilk went nutz after they lost the 2004 elections and declared Martial Law and took over the country. Yes, I'd support the invaders.

[Military Brat]

5. Are they "the enemy" if they invade to invoke a regime change?

What if they have invaded and occupied to "save us" from a despotic regime *wink-nudge* which is killing our youth in cannon fodder enterprises in other lands where we don't belong? Should we not greet these invaders as liberators, wave their flag, throw flowers at them, offer them Britney Spears in a pole-dancing routine?

And then, when the occupiers screw it up royally, we can instigate a resistance, especially if we confirm that all they are really after is our oil in Alaska and Texas. Of course, it's a shame that the pawns of war will die, rather than those who lurk behind the curtain, pulling the strings of power and feeding their already bloated egos.

[0007]

6. The variability of the question, Sir......

has no fixed quantitative value, without a known.

[Touchdown]

24. You can say that again

;-)

[0007]

7. The variability of the question, Sir......

has no fixed quantitative value, without a known.

[0007]

8. The variability of the question, Sir......

has no fixed quantitative value, without a known.

[Touchdown]

26. Second verse...same as the first...

:crazy:

[sam sarrha]

33. you mean like if China invaded and stoled all our high paying jobs?

and ruined our economy by dumping cheap subsidized products and got our factories closed and sent to them so they could rape profits with slave labor and with natural resource stolen from Tibet after invading and murdering 1,400,000 people, 25% of the population since 1959.....? i will have to think about that, and i do have a lot of time since my job got sent to China last year, and there isn't even a minimum wage job to be had because 20,000,000 Mexicans invaded and ....

[0007]

9. The variability of the question, Sir......

has no fixed quantitative value, without a known.

[0007]

13. Wow! what happend with all these post?

Only hit one time.

[eleny]

27. well, it was worth repeating

eom

[Selwynn]

21. unesessary verbiage to sound more sophisticated than you are...

..is bad enough, but spamming it repeatedly takes the cake.

Everyone understands what you said. The only difference is it takes longer to give it actual meaning. It doesn't aid quality conversation. It doesn't help illuminate your point with clarity. It doesn't make you sound intellectually gifted, or pithy, or sophisticated, or enlightened.

It takes away from the force and effect of any point you make because it is a level of language inappropriate to the context. The best rule of thumb always and forever is: use the simplest language that best conveys your point.

Sorry, feel free to now call me stuck up, arrogant, rude or anything else, but this kind of posting from guys like 0007/Magistrate bugs the hell out of me. I don't think it would bug me so much if I was blown away by the words and didn't know what they meant. I might think "wow, he's really smart." But instead, I know exactly what is meant and after staring at it for a second I think, "so, really its just using the most obtuse and cumbersome wordy language to say something ridiculously simple? That's just pitiful." :(

[TrogL]

30. It's a bug in the software

Every once in awhile, posting once gives you multiple entries. It's a known bug.

Did it occur to you that he's being sarcastic?

[JanMichael]

10. I can't answer that. It entirely depends who did it.

And under what circumstances it was done.

[sendero]

11. That is a kinda broad question...

... but I cannot envision any situation in which I would side with invaders.

[HereSince1628]

12. Well, my county was invaded by Walmart, and Tyson

I am trying not to collaborate.

Resist the feudal lords of corporate greed!

Is Arkansas really the home of the Nazgul???

[rogerashton]

15. Scenario:

China, Russia, Germany and France finally get fed up with the *Shrubster and invade to "DeNazify" the US. China occupies everything from California to Alabama, Russia the Pacific NW and midwest, France gets New England and Germany the rest.

I call for nonviolent resistance, general strike, total noncooperation with the invaders. If they respond with largescale bloodshed, then guerilla resistance becomes inevitable. If the *Shrubster should happen to fall into resistance hands, put him to work washing dishes. I wouldn't even turn him in -- though I sure as hell wouldn't take orders from the foul ball who created the situation.

[Capn Sunshine]

23. Of course you DO realize

under that scenario there wouldn't be much worthwhile saving, as that would trigger an immense nuclear strike, and all our shadow gov't types would be livin' the high life at Crystal Palace while we scamper about on a moonscape scrounging for insects and puking our guts up from raduiation sickness.

[AntiCoup2K4]

37. Can we have Germany invade the NW instead of Russia?

I got deathly ill the last time I drank vodka and swore it off forever :puke:

Beer's another story altogether though! :beer:

[Selwynn]

16. It depends on the "enemy"

[foo_bar]

17. rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves

[markus]

18. Man, the Freepers are gonna love this thread...

Remember, Bush et al think Irony is what Pickles does after the laundery.

[9215]

19. yes, if

the country invading had a non-elected leader who went against the UN's wishes and world opinion and called it
Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

And blew up my house and threatened to kill me if I protested and didn't buy from Burger King.

[_NorCal_D_]

20. Hell NO!

I would fight to the death with my vintage WWII Garand rifle! B-)

[Zorra]

22. If America was invaded.....

I would join the guerrilla resistance and possibly volunteer to be a suicide bomber.

[kyrasdad]

25. You don't see me collaborating with Bush do you?

And basically he took over the country... just used his daddy's money, friends, connecitons and court to do so

[9215]

38. LOL

Good one.

[TrogL]

28. It's likely I would *be* the enemy

With all your forces tied up in Iraq, Washington D.C. is easy pickings.

I'm kidding!!!!!!

[tom_paine]

29. No, would never side with foreign invaders

[Snow]

31. Too complex -

my wife's relatives did all of the above before the Japanese occupation of Korea and during. The relatives who were conspicuous, big-name resistors with political power got killed - but they made their point, raised more resistance, and maybe staved things off a while. The most conspicuous collaborator was basically a feudal landholder, and for his acceptance of the takeover was able to protect the people living in his fiefdom, something I'm willing to consider a fair trade since we're talking about 100,000 farm families and villagers here. My mother-in-law was a school-teacher, and when ordered to teach in Japanese by her principal, refused. She was threatened with being shipped off to be a "comfort woman", but it never happened, in part because her Japanese co-teachers respected her and backed her up, and in part because of her family background (she's from the Min clan, for those of you who would understand that).

So, in short, it depends very much on the attitude of the invaders, what position you are in and what you can do.

[NNN0LHI]

34. The use of the generic term "enemy" was on purpose

The same thing is going on in Iraq right now. Many Iraqis were not happy with Saddam. Many others were. It will depend on whos ox is getting gored of whether someone considers an occupier the enemy or not. Some people would see political or financial gain by collaborating with the occupier so to those people they are not the enemy. Others will lose what they once had with being occupied. To those people the occupier is the enemy. This would be the same in America as it is in Iraq.

Don

[LoneStarLiberal]

36. Not sure; If the invaders...

Not sure;

If the invaders ate Republicans and shit jobs, you bet.

[Padraig18]

39. No, I would not.

That little 'sovereignty' thing would sorta stick in my craw a bit, I think.