Antifa vs Capitol Hill

Post Reply New Topic

If you rob the bank armed with nothing more than a note claiming to have a weapon you've committed armed robbery, at least according to the courts.

That's true, you can't bluff with a bomb in that way, but I am trying to make sense of what seems like an illogical plan. You say there were too busy gawking, but if they planned to set off bombs, why take the time out to gawk?

And as far as not wanting to hurt their friends why didn't they just warn their friends that they are going to detonate the bomb and that the have seconds to get out, and they have been warned, if they don't? Wouldn't that make much more sense?

So I guess they weren't bluffing, but they got cold feet and were not serious about setting off the bombs, otherwise they would have done so in a lot less than two hours.

Give us a break Iron.

Were are talking about a disorganized mob of hundreds of clowns with painted faces dressed in buffalo headdresses. Not about a crack seal team focused on a mission, like taking out Ben Laden.

They weren't professional terrorists, that doesn't mean they weren't terrorists.

Well I guess why I am sounding kind of negative about it, because if a coup is successful, than at least the fighting will stop, because a new government has now taken over. So then at least then, someone wins and maybe peace will be in place again.

But the more these terrorists keep failing because they want to try to start a coup with one hand tied around their b@#%s, then more violence keeps happening and no one wins, and no piece then. Unless I am looking at it the wrong way? But it's like the country is just going to become more violent by not succeeding in a coup, if that makes sense.

You WANT the terrorists to win??????

And not because you have a liking for Trump? You just think that its a good idea for a mob to overthrow the government? WTF are you talking about?

Succeeding in a coup would result in even more violence because people who feel entitled to pull off a coup will have no respect for rule of law after they succeed and will continue to use violence against those who disagree with them or attempt to resist their criminal actions.

Are you trying to justify an insurrection by saying it will be more peaceful if the plotters win? I think you might forget that there are Federal forces that are bound by oath to protect our Constitution and government. There would have been more killing. The Irish Republican Army's attempt at changing the government resulted in decades of conflict. And we are not in the clear. The right-wing forces involved in this are still active. The US has a long history of right-wing terrorism against the government--Google Timothy McVeigh. And the right-wing militia the III% and Oath Takers were involved in this insurrection.

Capitol attackers have long threatened violence in rural American west

No I don't want them to win, I just am tired of all the violence and want it to end. But no one is succeeding in ending it. There is a war between the democrats and rebublicans and someone is going to win. But isn't it better than one side takes over and wins, rather than both sides keep constantly loosing, and thus more and more violence? Wouldn't you rather some side win already, than all this violent tic tac toe dead ends that keep happening, if that makes sense?

Aren't wars best over with quickly, rather than prolonging in tic tac toe dead ends?

This isn't a war. It's a criminal campaign of terror. The only acceptable outcome is for the terrorists to stop.

Yeah that's a good point. Hopefully they will. I don't want terrorists to win, but I want someone to win, so that it will stop. If the terrorists do not win, then hopefully the government will.

Last edited by ironpony on 09 Jan 2021, 4:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I want to apologize for my remarks but I got too emotionally riled up over the situation. I apologize.

I maintain that intent is important. Take a couple of more extreme situations:

1. An armed revolution to win independence from a brutally exploitative foreign power.
2. A pogrom commited against a despised ethnic minority.
Both will involve violence, destruction and death, but no-one even vaguely sane would argue that the two actions are morally equivalent.

Good point. But in this case you have to also assume that the side that promotes "wrong" politics has to actually "know" its politics is wrong. Because if the issue is controversial with some people on one side and some people on the other side, you can't really expect people to make decisions based on "your" view, they have to make decision based on "their" view.

So what you are basically saying is the following. Suppose someone deep down knows what they are promoting is "wrong", but they want to promote it for personal gain or whatever. In this case, even if they don't use violence, its already bad that they are promoting something that is wrong. If they do use violence that makes it even worse.

With that statement I agree. But then the question is about the premise: do you actually "know" that they know that what they are promoting is in the wrong? Or maybe they sincerely see that what they are doing is the right thing? And, if so, then based on your own logic they are justified in using violence to promote it.

The other point is that you can't refer to violence in order to discredit either side. You basically have to use other arguments to convince the reader that the other side is wrong and only "after that" refer to violence as something that makes it even worse.

A crowd of President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6, 2021, wearing and waving Trump-branded paraphernalia and flags as they sought to overturn the election.  There is no credible evidence that the crowd was infiltrated or led by antifa activists in disguise.  Specific individuals held up online as antifa activists turned out to be Trump supporters.  Trump had encouraged his supporters to come to Washington to protest the election.  He spoke at a rally hours before the violence erupted and urged those in attendance to march to Congress.

Anything you may have heard or read to the contrary is both unsubstantiated and untrue.

Source:  This Politifact Article 

Well it's hard to say, because if it was antifa, they would want to try to pin it on Trump supporters and try to make themselves look like Trump supporters to not be noticed as Antifa, wouldn't they?