SF Conservancy Speaks Out Against Developer Doing GPL Enforcement For Financial Gain

[smitty3268]

Out of all the nations in the world the US has -the- most powerful native might, and not by a little bit, by a whole lot. Even if a nation could overwhelm our naval might and land forces here, our native might would absolutely crush them. There is no nation in this world that could stand up to americans on our own soil, not even our own nation. I already gave one example in the american revolution, where we were invaded, we defeated the invaders, we developed our own logistics, trained our own forces, and ultimately won.

Tell the Vietnamese during american occupation, or Afgans during soviet occupation, or Chinese during japanese occupation that they had no chance of winning. Guess what they all did though? That's right they won. Don't underestimate a countries native might, especially when they have the home turf advantage.

It's entirely impossible to ever defeat a military like the US's if they are willing to use nuclear weapons. So any kind of hope basically relies on the start for having significant amounts of the military defect onto your side and rise up against the government, or at least refuse to follow orders and blow up the rebels.

[duby229]

It's entirely impossible to ever defeat a military like the US's if they are willing to use nuclear weapons. So any kind of hope basically relies on the start for having significant amounts of the military defect onto your side and rise up against the government, or at least refuse to follow orders and blow up the rebels.

I disagree, if the US used a nuke against their own people, every nation in this world would step up the the batters plate. The government would be especially doomed in that scenario. For sure a lot of people would die, no doubt. But they would have zero chances of winning.

EDIT: There is a reason the Americans and Soviets liked the term, "Mutual assured annihilation". If even one nuke was detonated in an act of war in this day and age, whoever was responsible will be destroyed. Sure America has nukes, but there is basically zero chance any of them will ever be used.

EDIT: I'd even dare say if the US detonated a nuke in todays age, it would guarantee civil war. Too many people would be completely unable to forgive the government. There would be insurrections in every county of every state across this entire country.

[smitty3268]

I disagree, if the US used a nuke against their own people, every nation in this world would step up the the batters plate. The government would be especially doomed in that scenario. For sure a lot of people would die, no doubt. But they would have zero chances of winning.

Traditionally, lots of civil wars have been less about winning and more about stubbornness and refusing to lose. And i highly doubt any foreign country would do much directly against a crazy country launching nukes, for fear of becoming a target themselves. Oh, they'd renounce them, and cut off any type of aid. But that wouldn't mean a whole lot at that point regardless.

I agree that setting one off would probably start a chain reaction and end up dooming everyone involved in the process. But if the government is going to lose anyway, they don't have much incentive not to go down swinging, and presumably you can't just rely on them being nice guys who wouldn't do such a thing if they're so bad that some kind of revolt against them was necessary in the first place.

Really, the best hope is for the military to make it clear from the beginning that they will refuse any orders to nuke civilians in the country. That's not an entirely unreasonable hope, I don't think, but it does require a leap of faith. Just assuming that any uprising would ultimately succeed and the military couldn't stop it if they really wanted to is being naive in my opinion.

[starshipeleven]

Out of all the nations in the world the US has -the- most powerful native might, and not by a little bit, by a whole lot. Even if a nation could overwhelm our naval might and land forces here, our native might would absolutely crush them. There is no nation in this world that could stand up to americans on our own soil, not even our own nation. I already gave one example in the american revolution, where we were invaded, we defeated the invaders, we developed our own logistics, trained our own forces, and ultimately won.

Lol, talk about self-defeating arguments. Civilians with light weapons vs "the nation with the most poweful native might". Who is going to win lololololol?

Tell the Vietnamese during american occupation,

heavy support from Chinese in weapons, supplies and training. US was DISTANT and most US citizens weren't terribly interested into the war at all, so they basically lost interest politically after some usual war images flooded the media and eventually retreated even if it could have been a military victory.

or Afgans during soviet occupation,

Heavy support from US, current generations of Afghan terrorists were in fact trained by US to fight Soviets.

or Chinese during japanese occupation

Japan occupied a TINY part of china, the rest of china was helping out there with something like the whole fucking military.

Don't underestimate a countries native might, especially when they have the home turf advantage.

The point you still don't get, is that "the countries native might" and "home turf advantage" is on both parties in the case of a US revolution.

[starshipeleven]

It's entirely impossible to ever defeat a military like the US's if they are willing to use nuclear weapons.

There is no need whatsoever to deploy nukes to defeat civilian rebels. Apart from the fact that nukes have that aura of cheesy movie, nukes as all very-high-yeld bombs are supposed to take out enemy infrastructure.

The ones launched on japan were mostly warning shots so they were dropped on completely unimportant targets just to get the message through, but in an actual war they would be targeted at the usual suspects:
water supplies (dams and whatnot), industrial areas, military bases, power production plants.

As anyone can guess, if you take out critical infratructure, you potentially deal MUCH more casualities than just dropping nukes on big cities, while also causing major annoyances to the enemy that now has to send support to his own population too or face their death within months.

The biggest weapon against rebels is mass media control, to show them as terrorists, mad, or even enemies of the common people.
It's not even hard to, just fake some "rebels" attacks against other civilians, place bombs with obvious "rebel" signature in placew where you kill civilians, and have some fake "rebel leaders" shout bs in fake rebel media you then have all TVs transmit.
As long as it isn't as cheesy as the stuff shown in movies about rebels, it does work.

[starshipeleven]

Ah, forgot to address this point:

I already gave one example in the american revolution, where we were invaded, we defeated the invaders, we developed our own logistics, trained our own forces, and ultimately won.

Your founding fathers that were not complete and utter morons signed alliances with France and then with Spain to get assistence on things they couldn't deal with themselves (large amounts of supply, navy and artillery support), and their new allies opened new wars on other sides of the british empire to distract the bulk of british forces which at the time were a fucking empire.

"Early fighting took place primarily on the North American continent. France, eager for revenge after its defeat in the Seven Years' War, signed an alliance with the new nation in 1778 that proved decisive in the ultimate victory.^[23] The conflict gradually expanded into a world war with Britain combating France, Spain, and the Netherlands. Fighting also broke out in India between the British East India Company and the French allied Kingdom of Mysore."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War

[starshipeleven]

Goddamn vBullettin.

I forgot to address one last point:

I already gave one example in the american revolution, where we were invaded, we defeated the invaders, we developed our own logistics, trained our own forces, and ultimately won.

Your founding fathers weren't complete morons and signed alliances with France and then Spain. Apart from providing support with supplies, artillery and navy they also opened new wars in other places of the british empire, distracting and splitting their forces.

Without the crucial assistence from outside, you would have lost too.

"Early fighting took place primarily on the North American continent. France, eager for revenge after its defeat in the Seven Years' War, signed an alliance with the new nation in 1778 that proved decisive in the ultimate victory.^[23] The conflict gradually expanded into a world war with Britain combating France, Spain, and the Netherlands. Fighting also broke out in India between the British East India Company and the French allied Kingdom of Mysore."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War

[duby229]

There is no need whatsoever to deploy nukes to defeat civilian rebels. Apart from the fact that nukes have that aura of cheesy movie, nukes as all very-high-yeld bombs are supposed to take out enemy infrastructure.

The ones launched on japan were mostly warning shots so they were dropped on completely unimportant targets just to get the message through, but in an actual war they would be targeted at the usual suspects:
water supplies (dams and whatnot), industrial areas, military bases, power production plants.

As anyone can guess, if you take out critical infratructure, you potentially deal MUCH more casualities than just dropping nukes on big cities, while also causing major annoyances to the enemy that now has to send support to his own population too or face their death within months.

The biggest weapon against rebels is mass media control, to show them as terrorists, mad, or even enemies of the common people.
It's not even hard to, just fake some "rebels" attacks against other civilians, place bombs with obvious "rebel" signature in placew where you kill civilians, and have some fake "rebel leaders" shout bs in fake rebel media you then have all TVs transmit.
As long as it isn't as cheesy as the stuff shown in movies about rebels, it does work.

Your a total idiot dude. You think nukes are made to take out infrastructure? Wow that's stupid. Years ago there was an attempt to create something called a tactical nuke, which would have been for that role. But as it turns out, traditional bombs cost a whole hell of a lot less and can be pumped out in far larger volume. Nukes from the first have only -ever- been intended to create terror.

[duby229]

Lol, talk about self-defeating arguments. Civilians with light weapons vs "the nation with the most poweful native might". Who is going to win lololololol?

heavy support from Chinese in weapons, supplies and training. US was DISTANT and most US citizens weren't terribly interested into the war at all, so they basically lost interest politically after some usual war images flooded the media and eventually retreated even if it could have been a military victory.

Heavy support from US, current generations of Afghan terrorists were in fact trained by US to fight Soviets.

Japan occupied a TINY part of china, the rest of china was helping out there with something like the whole fucking military.

The point you still don't get, is that "the countries native might" and "home turf advantage" is on both parties in the case of a US revolution.

This is easily the dumbest shit you ever wrote. It's obvious you don't know the differences between military might and native might. I really can't say anything else, Every single legitimate example I give you, you dismiss it. Why don't stop skipping classes and go to jr high today. It's plain you need it badly.

[duby229]

Goddamn vBullettin.

I forgot to address one last point:

Your founding fathers weren't complete morons and signed alliances with France and then Spain. Apart from providing support with supplies, artillery and navy they also opened new wars in other places of the british empire, distracting and splitting their forces.

Without the crucial assistence from outside, you would have lost too.

"Early fighting took place primarily on the North American continent. France, eager for revenge after its defeat in the Seven Years' War, signed an alliance with the new nation in 1778 that proved decisive in the ultimate victory.^[23] The conflict gradually expanded into a world war with Britain combating France, Spain, and the Netherlands. Fighting also broke out in India between the British East India Company and the French allied Kingdom of Mysore."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...olutionary_War

Spain never allied with America idiot. They were allied with France and entered the war because of its obligations to France.. I understand how it's comfortable to just quote wikipedia, but in this case that quote is definitely wrong.

Besides we still would have won. We won the very first engagement of the war and severely harassed the enemy the entire time. They were losing soldiers at all times. They were being shot at from every angle everywhere they went, during the entire war.