I would have hopelessly contaminated it. Poured motor oil in the ground. Burned any trees. Sprinkled arsenic into the soil. This looting can’t be allowed. Slash and burn it behind you before you let them steal it. Fight.
I agree, in a situation like that scorched earth is the best policy.
Re: “I would have hopelessly contaminated it. Poured motor oil in the ground. Burned any trees. Sprinkled arsenic into the soil. This looting can’t be allowed. Slash and burn it behind you before you let them steal it. Fight.”
I am in favor of scorched earth in these cases, but not illegal actions such as deploying poisons that might endanger innocent people like the developer’s construction workers. There are plenty of legal and nonviolent ways to screw up a development project, and most involve creative and aggressive application of environmental laws. The Left does this all the time to development projects it doesn’t like, even though the property was not taken by eminent domain.
Remember, the government can keep you from developing your own property if it finds an endangered species. If the land in question is inundated by rain, it might qualify as a wetland on which no development will be allowed. If you can’t do this with the property that was taken from you, the technique can be used against other projects that belong to the same developer. There are also regulations for demanding traffic impact studies, environmental impact studies, and so on, all of which run up the developer’s cost.
ps -- she agreed by the way.
Agree!
However, since it is CTbama, I'm willing to bet 99% of the "grabbees" dislocated will still vote for the "grabbers".