aggressor

Iran has not been an aggressor in a war in the last 150 years. How does that compare to your own country?

>>> Question is - who is the aggressor in this situation, really? Really?

The American government is a worldwide aggressor that cannot be restrained. All defenses must be put up in an attempt to stop it.

Given our attachment to history, Russia is still often seen as this "cold war" aggressor out to get you. But if the past decade is of any lesson, I think we have a new candidate on this role.

If an American POW comes back to the US and says the US was the aggressor in the Korean War, he does not have an opinion, he has been "brainwashed". What kind of mental gymnastics do I have to perform to think this way.

You'll probably lose in a fight, but no matter how weak you are, anyone can inflict at least some level of pain on an aggressor. It's truly sad the way so many kids have to deal with this, yet nothing is ever really done about it.

The American government is a worldwide aggressor that cannot be restrained. You're touching on something here.

This also has the added benefit of triggering the alert if the captor/aggressor turns off or destroys the phone. Just enable it when you know you're going to be entering a dicey situation.

\nMore bullying, because they know you tried to go through the system, which favors the aggressor because authorities are too busy putting pot smokers behind bars.

The people deserve to know when it's the US starting conflicts for various reasons, otherwise they'll only experience the backlash from those conflicts, and they'll wrongly think that country is the aggressor. And of course the US government will do whatever it can to paint them like that, too.

The continued portrayal of Eich as the victim instead of the aggressor bothers me a lot. To paint Eich as a good guy and those who opposed him as some evil misinformed opportunistic lynch mob is a complete reversal of reality.

And for those that notice but are too shy to kick up a fuss, there is always more subtle signalling that can be used: tilt your body away from the aggressor, go quiet and start a conversation with somebody outside the group - disinterest, and "awkwardness" can be powerful. * * *\n\nGoing slightly off-topic here just to say something that I care about.

For example, a gun is about 120% useless if you have it stored and the bad guy has the drop on you, which is likely the case on multiple levels given that that the 'bad guy' is the aggressor and initiator of a rare situation. for example, the 'bad guy' may have a gun himself, and seeing you wielding one may cause him to shoot you, when he otherwise wouldn't have.

And though it's good to see the aggressor in one of these lawsuits actually lose, it's saddening to think that if Oracle or a pure patent troll went after a company without 4 million to pay for a defensive suit, they would have won.

To many, it's not a case of evil infidels attacking, but rather the evil foreign aggressor killing their friends and family if a foreign country attacked yours, claiming to rid you of evil and imposing their morals on you, would you stand by as they killed people you knew, under the promise of a better land? This is how the coalition forces are seen by many, especially in Iraq.

In the article you refer to[1], it is shown that IBM was not the aggressor, as TurboHercules filed the first complaint, and the "threat letter" was merely IBM calling their bluff: "Your suggestion that TurboHercules was unaware that IBM has intellectual property rights in this area is surprising." Furthermore, the letter was a response to a request that IBM identify any intellectual property TurboHercules infringed.

China is seen as aggressor in Cyberwar, Chinese hard- and software is accused of having security problems, there are lots of discussions about the more aggressive role of China in Asia, the US has a huge trade deficit with China, China is accused of spying, ... But the US continues to sell its companies and its business to China and imports stuff from there more and more.

Because you have no idea what the government is doing in your name, and what kind of conflicts they are creating, and then "all of the sudden" you end up with another war on your hands, and the US government propaganda machine tells you it's their fault and they are the aggressor against US, when in fact it could be the opposite, and the attack may simply be retaliation for USA's own actions.