What's the difference?

[Michele 1]

What's the difference between 16 days of "civil unrest" or rioting, and civil war? I know that when there are riots that last a few days, that's pretty clear it's "only" a riot. But when does the line get crossed?

When the military is called in?
A time limit?
Number of deaths?
When it's religiously based rather than economically based?

I just can't figure out when it changes from one to the other. Or does it?

Anyone?

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Muenkel 0]

I think it depends on how the particular gov't wants to sell it to the world.

It's like pornography. The Supreme Court cannot define it, but adult bookstores know exactly what to sell.

_________________________________________
Chris

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

When it's religiously based rather than economically based?

Depends on how it's framed by your favorite news media.

Those rioters aren't out there now yelling "We want a job!", they are out there yelling "Allah is great!".

. . =(_8^(1)

[Michele 1]

Quote

Depends on how it's framed by your favorite news media.

Those rioters aren't out there now yelling "We want a job!", they are out there yelling "Allah is great!".

I try really hard to not let the media make my mind up for me...independent research is still the best way to determine things for oneself...including opposing views, should there be a decided lean one way or the other.

I was thinking about this today, you know? The 6 day war was, well, 6 days. It had invading countries so that's war pretty clearly. But civil war? That's the difference.

The US Civil war was both ideologically and economically based. The break-up of the USSR, without massive bloodshed or violence, was about ideological and economic issues, as well. From what I can see (and granted, I haven't studied wars too extensively), civil war tends to be a combination of both economic and ideological causes.

If that's the case, as it was in the Crusades (if you look at that independently), the situation in France is bordering on civil war. There are a group of people who, for economic reasons, came to France...and brought an ideology with them. That ideology is being exploited, and fueled with the economic aspect (no jobs, poor housing).

So at what point, do you think, does rioting become civil war? When the military comes in? Can't be, because it wasn't that way in LA during the 60's or the 90's. When war is declared? Then it already is, because the fatwahs have been issued.

I'm just wondering about it...because it seems pretty weird to have two-three week riots in Europe (and I don't include the football season stuff in my assessment. LOL).

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

So at what point, do you think, does rioting become civil war? When the military comes in? Can't be, because it wasn't that way in LA during the 60's or the 90's. When war is declared? Then it already is, because the fatwahs have been issued.

I think it becomes civil war when the antagonists aim towards toppling or otherwise getting out from under the government. Burning cars and breaking windows is a far cry from that, still in the form of "civil unrest".

And since the immigrants don't have the kinds of arms or support needed to topple the government, it probably won't evolve into civil war. The question is, what will it evolve into?

. . =(_8^(1)

[billvon 3,121]

Historically, the term 'civil war' seems reserved for fights where the insurgents have a chance of winning and overthrowing a government. The cause, the duration, the # of deaths don't seem as much of an issue.

By just about any standards, we're a lot closer to civil war in a place like Iraq than in a place like France.

[Michele 1]

Quote

I think it becomes civil war when the antagonists aim towards toppling or otherwise getting out from under the government. Burning cars and breaking windows is a far cry from that, still in the form of "civil unrest".

And since the immigrants don't have the kinds of arms or support needed to topple the government, it probably won't evolve into civil war. The question is, what will it evolve into?

I see your point completely. Thanks for that. So it's the ability to "overthrow" an existing government which creates the "war" aspect. Yes, I think I agree.

And yes, what will this evolve into? I can see smuggling arms to those who are rioting...by whom, I'm not sure. but I can see it happening. I can also see that appeasement could occur, which will be one of the worst things I could imagine; that's permission to do it again next time someone's affronted somehow.

Sticky wicket the french seem to be on. Poor people. I feel badly for the citizenry, you know?

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Sticky wicket the french seem to be on.

Yea, it is a very difficult situation, and a winning solution seems difficult or impossible for the French at this point.

For the US, it's another strong indicator that we need to get the illegal immigration situation solved.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Michele 1]

Agreed wholeheartedly.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Those rioters aren't out there now yelling "We want a job!", they are out there yelling "Allah is great!".

Not in France they're not.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[wmw999 2,593]

Yup. If we're talking about France, from what I understand, there is a pretty firm anti affirmative action sentiment there. Which means that you hire whoever is the "most qualified." Which ends up meaning that for all but the regulated, "most qualified" means "someone I'm comfortable with" which means "not Islamic headscarf or beard-waaring" and "not African."

Yes, there are success stories. There were successful black people before the Civil War, too. Not a whole lot of them, though.

I read a pretty good article today in the local paper here.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Yup. If we're talking about France, from what I understand, there is a pretty firm anti affirmative action sentiment there. Which means that you hire whoever is the "most qualified." Which ends up meaning that for all but the regulated, "most qualified" means "someone I'm comfortable with" which means "not Islamic headscarf or beard-waaring" and "not African."

Yes, there are success stories. There were successful black people before the Civil War, too. Not a whole lot of them, though.

I read a pretty good article today in the local paper here.

Wendy W.

Yes, the French need to raise taxes immediately to pay for more social programs to solve this injustice.

[Frenchy68 0]

Very good article.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Yes, the French need to raise taxes immediately to pay for more social programs to solve this injustice.

Actually, it's the other way round. French society has to stop using the "ostrich" policy of ignoring problems and throwing money at it hoping it will take care of itself. There are benefits to certain social programs, but they do very little against high unemployment rate and lack of creation of new jobs. The problem is that France is a fairly rigid society, where changes do not happen very quickly. Many governments have tried, and many have failed.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes, the French need to raise taxes immediately to pay for more social programs to solve this injustice.

Actually, it's the other way round. French society has to stop using the "ostrich" policy of ignoring problems and throwing money at it hoping it will take care of itself. There are benefits to certain social programs, but they do very little against high unemployment rate and lack of creation of new jobs. The problem is that France is a fairly rigid society, where changes do not happen very quickly. Many governments have tried, and many have failed.

I don't know much about French Society, but how are they throwing money at a problem without solving it? What programs are they spending the money on? Is it just welfare without incentives and training? Are you saying French Society is inherently racist and no amount of money will solve the problem until the French change their attitude towards immigrants?

What is your view of a solution?

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

how are they throwing money at a problem without solving it? What programs are they spending the money on?

IMO, the biggest obstacle to cut down unemployment in France is the rigidity of the employment laws. You can hire all you want, but can not layoff without express authorization of the local authorities (and indirectly the unions...). Which means that there is very little turnaround, and scores of young people with tons of diploma can not find qualified work, as sometimes underqualified people hold a position for years. Once in a while, when it gets really bad, the government will throw tax breaks or subsudies to companies to appease them, which does nothing to solve the problem in the long term. There are also some training and incentive programs for people on the dole. However, due to the fact that it is so hard to part with an employee who is not performing adequately, companies will use trainees until their contract expires, then thank them, and get a new trainee in. Cheap labor. And if one of them is qualified, it's unlikely he/she will be hired, as there is already someone (sometimes less qualified) under contract! Some kids spend years going from short term trainee contract to another.

Quote

Are you saying French Society is inherently racist and no amount of money will solve the problem until the French change their attitude towards immigrants?

Like most society, there is a certain level of prejudice within French society. If you look at the history of France over the past 250 years, it's a succession of excesses: from a revolution that defines modern democracy to a dictator who brings slavery back, to a king, to another revolution, to another emperor, to the Dreyfus affair, to another republic, to Vichy and the deportation of thousands of jews, to another Republic, etc... Things in France change though extreme measures.
When the economy kicks ass, people don't mind immigrants. When the shit hits the fan, they do. France needs more than a change of attitude towards immigrants. It needs to completely overhaul its social structure.

Quote

What is your view of a solution?

I have many of them, but they probably sound better in my mind than they would be effective. I'm not quite sure to tell the truth...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[nacmacfeegle 0]

I reckon it becomes a 'civil war' if some form of command or control structure emerges to direct the unrest.
IE if say someone called 'Le-Nac' came up with some sort of manifesto or serious list of demands or solutions and organised the current apparently nebulous unrest, we might end up with a new 'Nac-Publique', with Fraternity, Egality, Fraternity, and pain au chocolat for all.

I don't think the current rioters want the government or administration system toppled, they're just wanting a some if the inequalities sorted out. Had the been rioting to remove the government, I'd say it might border on the civil war.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson