Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK, let's talk about martial law for a moment. When civil authorities have lost control and are overwhelmed, martial law is declared and the military restores order. An present example would be parts of our cities that are controlled by armed gangs and that local police are afraid to go into. This is a situation where martial law is justified but is regretably not used. Our uncontrolled southern border is another instance. When is the last time martial law has been declared in the US? The San Franscisco earthquake at the beginning of the last century?
For there to be a civil war, there must be a unifying cause. There is no great unifying cause. Abortion rights? The Ten Commandments in court houses? Same Sex marriage? Universal health care? Government control of the internet? A ban on texting while driving? What cause are you willing to die for? Cancelling sports on TV might do it for some of us. We are not a principled society any longer and have no common inviolable principles to rally around. We don't care what happens as long as it isn't happening to us. We are overdue for enslavement. But consider this about "us against them": they are us.
Vote against the incumbent, everytime, forever.
Martial law was declared in certain areas during the Rodney King riots. NG and Marines were sent in. As to a 'unifying cause' in the US at present, taxation without representation is at the top of the list. People are also getting fed up with the invasivness of things like the Patriot act, and to much power being granted to the Federal government. Representitaves ignoring the feelings of their constituants in the name of 'voting their conscience' etc. This is what the general dissent is building on. Most of the issues you mentioned are not very relevant in the grand scheme of things.
One of the most dangerous things an attack aircraft pilot runs into in a ground support role is small arms fire. You can doubt away. But it's a fact. When you have 50 or 60 or more, guys with automatic rifles blasting away at low flying aircraft, it gets pretty nasty in a hurry. That does not take a rocket scientist to figure out.
You need to read some field manuals before your guerillas take to the field. The lead on slow-moving aircraft (helicopters) is 50 yards, for fast-moving aircraft: 100 yards. Your fire is imprecise like all out. I know, intuitively, it seems as if it should work, but it doesn't.
There's a reason armies don't train their riflemen for anti-aircraft shooting, except as mentioning it as a last-ditch effort: It sucks. If you have good logistics, you can hope for the one-in-a-million round, if not, save your ammo. (That is in the field manuals as well.) You're better off with belt-fed machine guns with tracers, but even those are a very, very long shot.
Hinds operated with near impunity over Afghanistan until SAMs showed up. A-10s are even designed to take 7.62 and soldier on. (They have done so.) As far back as WWI, slow and flimsy aircraft flow close-support against massed infantry with negligible losses.
There was the Blackhawk over Somalia that was taken out by an RPG, and that still has to count as one of the luckiest shots ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverOne
In the war between the states only 5% of the population actually stood the line. There are at least 85 million gun owners if only 10 % stand the line it would be the largest army in the world.
A bunch of people with guns do not an army make. Armies are organization, logistics, structure, communications and people with guns. You can teach someone to shoot in a couple of days, make him/her a soldier that won't actively endanger his unit in perhaps a few months.
If you throw a bunch of armed civilians together against organized forces, you may be able to form units that can operate at the company level or so, after the initial bloodletting - which will be horrendous. It's good to be brave. It's effective to be smart. Soldiering is hard, and armies practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber
As to a 'unifying cause' in the US at present, taxation without representation is at the top of the list.
Who's being taxed without representation? (Well, I am, obviously, but I haven't noticed any warlike tendencies within myself lately.)
HUH? The Vietnamese managed to shoot down over 3.000 US choppers primarily small arms.
I was on one.
You can train cannon fodder in 4-5 months, to become a skilled infantryman takes 2-3 years of hard training.
I agree with the premise of a practiced military, but when you get old F**ts that won't give up and don't have that much longer to live, that really love and fought for this country to see it being taken away. What have they got to lose a slow lingering death by medical panels or a quick one.
Awhile back I read an article of what was estimated manpower to impose martial law on the US. Estimation was about 65 million men to control each and every city 24-7. In martial law they might be able to control the large cities or they may just let the big cities be a free fire zone and lock down all the roads till food and water ran out.
HUH? The Vietnamese managed to shoot down over 3.000 US choppers primarily small arms.
I was on one.
First, I salute your service - hope you got out OK.
I do so hate to sound argumentative with someone who's been there, but it is my impression that military helicopters have undergone serious improvements in survivability since Vietnam.
Quote:
You can train cannon fodder in 4-5 months, to become a skilled infantryman takes 2-3 years of hard training.
Agreed, with the usual caveats for natural ability etc. A couple of months is where the recruit is not necessarily a liability. It takes longer to become an asset. (Depends on the task as well. If the mission is "Stand in this hole and tell us over the radio when 3rd Shock Army runs you over", you can make do with less skilled manpower.)
I agree with the premise of a practiced military, but when you get old F**ts that won't give up and don't have that much longer to live, that really love and fought for this country to see it being taken away. What have they got to lose a slow lingering death by medical panels or a quick one.
Awhile back I read an article of what was estimated manpower to impose martial law on the US. Estimation was about 65 million men to control each and every city 24-7. In martial law they might be able to control the large cities or they may just let the big cities be a free fire zone and lock down all the roads till food and water ran out.
What nonsense ! DEeath Panels --pleeeeese You can control the american people wit 30 second soundbites-they do you.
I would guess that any social uprising will more closely resemble anarchy instead of a war. If a civil war were attempted, where would the new Mason-Dixon line be? A quarter of Texas are doe-eyed liberal Democrats and we would have to ship Austin and San Antonio somewhere else. I'm afraid the residents of San Antonio would not like to be shipped a 1000 miles away from their native home in Mexico. I vote that anarchy is a more likely scenario, i.e., every person for themselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
