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.
I guess it's hard for people who haven't served to understand but this is something that every service member thinks about at some point. Most of us have had very deep conversations with our brothers and sisters in the service about what they would do if it came down to it.
During my time in the service I never met a single person who would openly admit that they would follow orders to fire on or in any way harm American citizens on American soil in the event of some sort of uprising. Most of the people I served with would not stand by and let the US Government attack it's own people.
After all, families and friends are "the people". Government loves no one and only covets more power and money and Obama is a perfect example. Only those led by their nose rings don't realize it.
It's not only the military or national guard but he ATF and FBI at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Neither of those ended well but it did take overwhelming force on the side of the government to win. Multiply that times 1,000 or more and the odds start to shift as the government is spread thin.
If you look at the amount of force and number of dead and injured on the Gov. side in cases like Waco you quickly see why the US military wants nothing to do with ground combat with US citizens.
The citizens did pretty well against the British during the American Revolution. Not to mention, Afghanistan held their own agains the Soviets. Other than that good post.
Well, the odds were more even in the 18th century you must admit. The other thing to consider is this: Yes, the government could obliterate whole city blocks (Hell, whole cities for that matter) but the world would stand in utter shock and disbelief were that to happen. A likelier scenario would be the government declaring martial law in certain areas deemed to be in 'rebellion' and troops would be sent in with relatively minor arms. Mind you, this is utter fantasy to me; I just don't see it happening.
How quickly everyone forgets dorner and what this one mans shinanigins did to the US police force.
I forgot about him. Along those same lines, the DC Sniper. I don't agree with why he did it but his technique is a perfect example of urban guerrilla warfare.
After all, families and friends are "the people". Government loves no one and only covets more power and money and Obama is a perfect example. Only those led by their nose rings don't realize it.
Yep exactly, and let's be brutally honest about our military... for every war loving commando out there volunteering for additional tours in the sand box there are 50 good hearted family guys who are doing their job trying to stay alive so they can get back to their families and go back to their normal lives. Those guys aren't interested in a civil war on US soil because they know the people they're fighting against are just like them.
With those guns they can capture equipment. Without guns you are at the will of the tyrant. It's kind of strange how blacks have issue with slavery but are so willing to give in to the same idea.
What does race have to don this this and don't you also have an issue with slavery?
It can't happen here. If the people of the United States decided to violently overthrow the government, it wouldn't last long. The military has jets, drones, tanks, anti-material rifles, claymores, etc. What would do the U.S. people have? A lot of guns. Guns don't do much against unmanned planes.
What do the rebels in Syria have at their disposal compared to their armed forces?
The opening salvo would be devastating, but shortly would turn into a civil war, with both sides giving and taking casualties equally.
The 2nd amendment protects us from this happening.
"The 2nd amendment was placed there to protect the people from a tyrannical government."
No, it wasn't. It was placed there to assist the U.S. government because U.S. military was insufficient. It was placed there to help keep the slaves in place and put down any uprisings or attacks. It wasn't placed there to be used against our government.
Well, the odds were more even in the 18th century you must admit. The other thing to consider is this: Yes, the government could obliterate whole city blocks (Hell, whole cities for that matter) but the world would stand in utter shock and disbelief were that to happen. A likelier scenario would be the government declaring martial law in certain areas deemed to be in 'rebellion' and troops would be sent in with relatively minor arms. Mind you, this is utter fantasy to me; I just don't see it happening.
Perhaps not. But in this crazy world, nothing suprises me, and I rule nothing out.
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.
