A Collaborator in Your Neighborhood

But treason is much more wrong and that very traitor is potentially helping murder my countrymen.  I'd be willing to die to defend my country and my countrymen from collaborators and to intimidate other collaborators.  What type of citizen or honorable person would I be if I let their crime go unpunished because "murder is wrong"?  I couldn't live with myself if I didn't do my duty.  That's my line of reasoning.

How can you say that?  Wouldn't you want to defend your country if it were being violated?

How can you say that?  Wouldn't you want to defend your country if it were being violated?

[/QUOTE]

No, I want to defend myself, my personal property and my interests.  You claim to like realpolitik so much, I just practice it with me in place of hte nation.  After all thats the reason most powerful and sucessful people do anything, for themselves, the rhetoric of nations is only to get people to support them.  If by resisting I got killed and by co-operating with occupiers I got cash and a harem I would go with the colaborators, that is, as long as thier culture/ideals/presence I did not deem a threat.

For example, if communists, religious nuts, or terrorists took control of the US I would resist because they are a personalt threat to ME and what I like, if however people who were relateviely harmless, culturally superior in my view, or people whos nations ideals I like more than mine, what reason do I have to resist them?

P.S.

On behalf of the entire population of the UK I wouldlike to answer no to your question. As yet nobody's put a gun to Tony Blair head and gone Bang!

Just because I disagree with them, doesn't mean I don't see their reasoning.  They are using my line of reasoning, only to attain a different end.  And it is in the ends that humans are divided and how I judge people, not their rationale.

I'd disagree.  I think it's the ends that separates the leaders of history.  Look at how different fundamental motivations were for the delegates at Versailles.  And look at the motivations of leaders like Hitler (a utopian race dream), Peter the Great (modernizing Mother Russia),  Winston Churchill (defend the honor of the fading empire), etc.  I know that you mean increasing the power of their nations by "the same ends", but I'd consider what they plan to do with that power as their true end, and the power as just the means.  I hope I made myself a little bit clearer.

I would have to say if any enemy actually invaded the US I would join in with them, whether they be Islamic extremists, Fascist authoritarians or Khmer Rouge. I feel that the US is so mired in its own failings that the only way to work something out would be to start fresh, I can always change the ideology of the invaders after they leave, like an immediate coup.