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.
Not that it would ever happen except in a right wingers wetdr**m... If you think you would defeat a determined US military force because you have an AK under your bed, you are delusional.
Hmmm... A bunch of Afghani goat-f*ckers have kept a “determined US military force” more than a little occupied for how many years now?
None of mine are registered. None of mine ever will be.
I wonder how many people that are pro-Hong Kong will overlook the fact that even the protesters are not exactly "innocent" in how they deal with the situation.
non violent resistance was a strategy, it may have worked in the US and against britain, it won't against leaders in Iran and china. That's already been proven in tiananmen square and in Iran.
An unarmed populace stands no chance against tyrannical governments like China and Iran.
The crackdowns on protests in Hong Kong and Iran make me even more rock-certain that we need to get rid of Trump. He loves that kind of thing, stomping on dissenters. He was praises someone - Egypt, maybe - on their lack of protests, which are illegal there.
Why is it that bootlickers such as yourself want to create an atmosphere where State agents (who are already immoral murderers by default) feel less pressure not to slaughter innocents just because they can?
An unarmed populace stands no chance against tyrannical governments like China and Iran.
An armed population has no chance against a tyrannical government. I'm pro-gun (lifetime NRA member), but the argument that the population needs to be armed for protection from the government is nonsensical. You may be surprised to learn that the military has access to weapons that are vastly superior to anything a civilian has access to.
An armed population has no chance against a tyrannical government. I'm pro-gun (lifetime NRA member), but the argument that the population needs to be armed for protection from the government is nonsensical. You may be surprised to learn that the military has access to weapons that are vastly superior to anything a civilian has access to.
You really think that the military would kill their friends and family?
Not that it would ever happen except in a right wingers wetdr**m... If you think you would defeat a determined US military force because you have an AK under your bed, you are delusional.
So how does surrendering it make that any worse? Maybe one person can't make a stand, but thousands and better yet millions can.
You really think that the military would kill their friends and family?
Nope.
Not sure what your statement has to do with the concept that an armed populace could/couldn't resist an earnest government action. Armed citizens will have minimal impact on such an action. Soldier's concern for friends and family will, but that's not what we're discussing.
Not sure what your statement has to do with the concept that an armed populace could/couldn't resist an earnest government action. Armed citizens will have minimal impact on such an action. Soldier's concern for friends and family will, but that's not what we're discussing.
Many of the military would turn against a government that turns completely bad. They would join the citizens.
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.
