|
You can even become your own kingdom (see california, Hawaii, texas, ...) before becoming part of another kingdom. It may not be straightforward, however; as Linebarger states: > Formally, war may be defined as the "reciprocal application of violence by public, armed bodies." > If it is not reciprocal, it is not war, the killing of persons who do not defend themselves is not war, but slaughter, massacre, or punishment. > If the bodies involved are not public, their violence is not war. Even our enemies in World War II were relatively careful about this distinction, because they did not know how soon or easily a violation of the rules might be scored against them. To be public, the combatants need not be legal—that is, constitutionally set up; it suffices, according to international usage, for the fighters to have a reasonable minimum of numbers, some kind of identification, and a purpose which is political. If you shoot your neighbor, you will be committing mere murder; but if you gather twenty or thirty friends, together, tie a red handkerchief around the left arm of each man, announce that you are out to overthrow the government of the United States, and then shoot your neighbor as a counterrevolutionary impediment to the new order of things, you can have the satisfaction of having waged war. (In practical terms, this means that you will be put to death for treason and rebellion, not merely for murder.) > ... Note that this advice was from the mid-XX; in the XXI not all kingdoms seem to recognise the Geneva Conventions anymore! These days it's probably a case of conjugating irregular verbs? I am a (dissident turned) freedom fighter
You are a (perfidious) combatant
They are (drug-running) terrorists
|