Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Quid pro quo ... inconveniencing

Hitting the innocent is downright criminal.



By that logic, couttries shouldn't counter tarriff the U.S. and take it on the chin.

Sadly the innocent are always the victims under leadership decisions. The method here involves angering them and hopefully overhtrowing the leaders who caused this. we'll see how it goes here.


> Sadly the innocent are always the victims under leadership decisions

What you have stated is that, following your view, "people should impale leaders".

> angering them and hopefully overhtrowing the leaders

And that you would pester John to turn him against Jack. What should happen instead is that John will rightfully react against you (possibly both of you), with justification.

It is very basic lucid plain logic.


So, sniper, any arguments? Now you look as if I denounced a vile perspective and some responded with a vile action.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: