I'll nail Jones next and double b!££ the he££ out of him (since he raised the issue).

First Point

Here is why you are a friend, even though at times you and I may espouse different policies - no Pullsit here:

Sophistry would be "I am part of you and you are part of me, we are interconnected by longstanding ties of history, culture and social diversity. We cannot be separated because our diversity unites us therefore my rules are our rules; and since for you to contravene your rules would be contrary to nature if you did that I would naturally slap you up the side of the head since that is what you really want me to do."
Besides you are nuts enough to put aircraft into very, very lousy landing fields; take out Hankooki Pu$$!; and are one of my three "Stallion" all-around pilots (excluding military jet jockeys) - the other two have Italian ancestry (you ?).

Second Point

If you insurged, I would neutralize you - not a dodge (neutralize = kill, detain or convert). But, the emphasis depends on the governance.

In example #1 - my "rule of law", a constitutional process exists for change (majority rule for "ordinary stuff"; 2/3 or 3/4 for extraordinary). So, the probabilities of an insurgency are lessened in what I see as a "true democracy" (as I have defined "Rule of Law"). Note that a "Rule of Law Democracy" might be quite nasty as to the minority that refuses to accept the "constitutional rule of law" - including the death penalty. That all depends on that group's accepted Social Norms. But, the thrust of "neutralize" would likely be to convert, detain, kill in that priority order.

In example #2 - my "rule by law", I (as dictator) have some choices. Based on the probabilities (and given my resource capabilities), my better choices in priority order are kill, detain, convert. None are excluded; but I as dictator want to completely control the situation and every aspect. You and I have not lived under that - kowalskil has - please read his autobio (yup; he's an old ba$tard like Ken - and I'm getting there - live with it).

My point is that "true democracies" (using my construct of the "Rule of Law") and "true autocracies" (using my construct of the "Rule by Law" and applying it without pity) are not as likely to be insurged - opinions differ as to what their respective probabilities are. The governments that are "in between" get butchered on a much more regular basis.

So, if a "Rule of Law", I'm going to do my most to convert Carl. If a "Rule by Law", putting Carl alongside the long-tail in his avatar would be a high choice.

That's a long bunch of Bravo Sierra (hi Stan ) to confirm your second point.

Cheers

Mike