What does it take to be a good revolutionary?

So, I was looking around on wikipedia and I noticed that the definition of revolutionary is: a person who demands fundamental change in power or organizational structures, constitutional change. a person who demands it NOW.

By that definition, and looking at all the out of control drug laws and military spending and what have you, I guess most of us are revolutionaries, but none of us are any good at it. why is that?

>Civil disobedience is only good if the government actually respects its people.
Not necessarily. If civil disobedience means not working the jobs that keeps the tyrants fat and wealthy then it's only a matter of time until it achieves its goal. Violence against civilians is only supposed to scare people into getting back in line, it's not a long term tactic because you can't simply kill off all your workers.

If Assad wants to slaughter the population very soon he's going to find that there's no one left to farm his fields, pump his gas or make his weapons.

>>41
If "population" equals armed terrorist gangs in your wording, then Assad has every right of exterminating it.

>>42
No, it doesn't. It equals unarmed men, women and children killed in their homes by the heavy weaponry of the Syrian army.

No, it doesn't. It equals unarmed men, women and children killed in their homes by the heavy weaponry of the Free Syrian army.

Fixed.

>>44
Oh herp derp. So the Free Syrian Army got their hands on heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and tanks but decided to use them on civilians instead of the army? Yeah, that sounds likely.

>>45
They got their hands on gun caches, explosive devices, which pretty much qualifies as heavy weaponry in general. They plant these explosive devices in heavily populated civilian areas, kill pro-government civilians, labeling them as "Shabiha" or civilians which even slightly oppose or speak out against them. They also kill civilians to later lay the blame on the Syrian security forces and the Syrian Arab Army. Without the heroic security forces risking their live to keep Syria safe for its citizens, these terrorists would have caused much more harm and bloodshed among the Syrian people, including using chemical weapons to later blame Assad. Down with Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the Zionist entity. Death to the terrorists. Only the lion Bashar al Assad can promote and keep peace and security for Syria.

>>44
There are corrupt traitors and people who take the wrong decision in the security forces, too. But if some militans were to create chaos in an US American city, would Obomber just stand and watch? No, he would wipe these terrorists off the streets.

>>45
Syria will only find peace and a peaceful democratic transition if every remaining terrorist is wiped out.

>>46
Assad hasn't done a good job at keeping the peace it seems.

>>49
Under the current circumstances, the lion Bashar al Assad does very well and in the best interest of the Syrian Arab people.

Further reading on current events in the Syrian Arab Republic:
http://sana.sy/eng/337/2012/08/14/436136.htm

http://sana.sy/index_eng.html
http://syriaonline.sy
http://radio-damascus.net/

A Former al-Jazeera Correspondent: I Was Asked to Report False News on Syria:

http://sana.sy/eng/22/2012/05/04/416824.htm

Down with the Qatari clown royal donkey family.

Historically the most succesful revolutionary individuals are those who were there from the beginning, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, they were all old school long before their party came to power, long before it looked as though it had any chance of success.

However a succesful revolution depends on turning some of the most conformist assholes imaginable, a revolution needs practical people on it's side and these are often already in the employ of the regime you're trying to usurp.

>>53
You don't start a revolution for the sake of having a revolution. The Western-backed rats and cockroaches in Syria are attempting to overthrow a revolutionary regime.