- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would the people have a chance against the government...
Posted on 1/28/18 at 11:21 am to Raptordawg
Posted on 1/28/18 at 11:21 am to Raptordawg
quote:
Would the people have a chance against the government...
Of course.
1
Posted on 1/28/18 at 11:29 am to EKG
Insurgents from George Washington to the Taliban enjoy a huge strategic advantage. They can lose every single battle but as long as there are more battles to come, they're winning. The occupier has to enforce a peace.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 11:30 am to shinerfan
Great point.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 11:35 am to thelawnwranglers
quote:Mostly the north did with the help of France. There were a lot of loyalists in the South.
We beat the government once
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:00 pm to shinerfan
quote:
The occupier has to enforce a peace.
This is how Saddam stayed in power. And he would still be there if not for the US - the Iraqi people were never, ever going to remove him. They weren't "winning" at all.
quote:
Insurgents from George Washington to the Taliban enjoy a huge strategic advantage.
That's not strategy. That's endurance.
quote:
They can lose every single battle but as long as there are more battles to come, they're winning.
This is naive.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:02 pm to starsandstripes
Baghdad couldn't be controlled in it's entirety, try Houston on for size.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:04 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
Mostly the north did with the help of France. There were a lot of loyalists in the South.
At the time of The Revolution,The South was mostly unsettled by whites,except along The Coast.
The Natives Liked the British and French. You are right by default.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:04 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
There were a lot of loyalists in the South.
You have a profound ignorance in all topics. It's astounding how uninformed you are.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:13 pm to auggie
quote:
At the time of The Revolution,The South was mostly unsettled by whites,except along The Coast.
The Natives Liked the British and French. You are right by default.
No he's not. The Loyalist stronghold was in New York and in New Jersey they were raising a Loyalist miitary force and promising the Brits that Loyalists were going to come out of all corners to help protect the crown. Then the Brits went to South Carolina, thinking such things were true, and they got their asses whipped.
For fricks sakes this thread is disturbing.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:27 pm to starsandstripes
I am talking about inland places that are now considered The South. At the time of The Revolution,there was not enough white Population in Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi,Florida,Louisiana,Arkansas,to even make a significant contribution to the war,and probably didn't even get much news about it.
In these areas,trade continued with the British and french traders out of need,and that continued,even after The Revolution.
Maryland, Virginia,North Carolina,South Carolina,and Georgia would have been the only Southern States,and excepting Virginia,didn't really have significant white populations yet,except along The coast.
In these areas,trade continued with the British and french traders out of need,and that continued,even after The Revolution.
Maryland, Virginia,North Carolina,South Carolina,and Georgia would have been the only Southern States,and excepting Virginia,didn't really have significant white populations yet,except along The coast.
This post was edited on 1/28/18 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:31 pm to Raptordawg
quote:
Just got into a major discussion with my liberal BIL. He is emphatic that even with all the guns an knowledge of our people that if it came to blows the revolution would be wiped out quickly.
He must be under the impression that none of the Federal government would defect to the cause. Hell, look at the fighting within the FBI and the competition amongst government agencies going on now, in a time of domestic peace.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 12:44 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
mmcgrath
Sometimes, I think it's your goal to say at least one blindingly stupid thing totally at odds with the facts per day.
Your level of ignorance on this board is basically unparalleled in terms of longevity and consistency.
Whoever is 2nd to you is brilliant by comparison.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 1:10 pm to auggie
quote:
The largest part of The Military,would be assigned to protect Infrastructure nationwide. No matter what happens,if The infrastructure is destroyed,so is The future of The Nation.
The fight would be among civilian factions mostly. It is a losing proposition for The Military to get involved in a revolution.
The capitols would get protection,any politician outside of these areas would be fricked. Eventually,even the civilians run out of supplies and ammo,then the military would move in and declare martial law,without much resistance.
I think after a period of Martial Law,democracy would gradually return,dominated by the winners of the revolution.
If the military took on The civilian population of The U.S. They would lose quickly,not only because of guns,but also because of food.
If The military had to feed the entire military on stored rations,they would be depleted pretty quick and maintaining supply lines nationwide would stretch them too thin to have a chance.
Logistics are just as important as firepower,and in a country the size of the U.S. with a well armed populace would be impossible to maintain.
The only chance an existing government would have is that the uprising against it is small. If it were large enough and widespread the people would simply stop producing things the military and government need. No shots would be fired. Unless they went Hunger games scenerio.
To destroy this country you need the people to turn on each other.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 2:30 pm to tagatose
quote:
To destroy this country you need the people to turn on each other.
I don't agree with this completely.
I think conservatives ideals, although varying,are close enough,that we would not fight against each other.This would be the group that you would need to destroy,and that isn't possible.
Democrats on the other hand,are made up of many different ideals. They would fall apart easily,and end up fighting each other,when it got down to the nitty gritty. I also don't think that many who currently vote as democrats,would actually trust that group enough to fight alongside each other,for each others ideals such as gay rights and open immigration policies.
This post was edited on 1/28/18 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 1/28/18 at 2:38 pm to auggie
Sticking with the scenerio of the OP, people vs government, I guess you could say that the government could win by slowly fundamentally changing the country. Not by brute force but slow incremental changes that takes us to a style of government ruled by elites. oh wait
Posted on 1/28/18 at 2:38 pm to jmarto1
quote:
Agreed that the military won't turn against the people. Without manpower to operate the huge technological advantage we would have the upper hand. However, if they could man enough of the aircraft, drones, armor, and such then we would have a tough time. The key of the people would be to organize. Saw a stat from USFWS that 15.7 million people over 6 went hunting. That's a serious army if you can organize and supply.
Strom Thurmond used to preach this to us here in SC ... he was very strategic in planning for the future which he always said would eventually lead to another civil war.
He used his power and influence to build-up SC into a military powerhouse. Under his leadership SC can thank him for ...
Fort Jackson's build up.
Chas AFB
Sumter AFB
Paris Island's build up.
3rd Corp relocating here.
Sopako ... supplies all the MREs.
FN Manufacturing ... builds all of our military's small arms right in Columbia, SC.
Force Protection in his home town of Edgefield ... tech driven designers and engineers as well as manufacturers of armoured vehicles and upfitting of others.
Bell Helicopter in Greenville
Applied Defense Industries
Raytheon Engineering & Aerospace
He always said, if it ever happened again, we would not starve and we would not be outgunned.
We have the largest per capita veteran population in the country ... he made it attractive for vets to retire here by affording us one of the finer VA systems in the country through Dorn VA and MUSC and it is all overseen through the Strom Thurmond Federal Building in downtown Columbia.
We're near Fort Bragg ... my military alma mater and home to America's Guard of Honor. More 82nd Vets live in SC than all of NC because we're the most Conservative by far.
So when you're talking about current troops ... they will never turn on our citizenry en mass. Some may, the Obama loyalists ... but they are greatly outnumbered and only surviving in our military right now by the grace of military protocol and chain of command.
Which does bring-up a good point.
Obama's Generals need to be purged from our military ASAP ... and don't say it cannot be done because Obama purged some great leaders, officers and NCOs, from our military. It was one of the first things he did. I knew/know several of them personally from four star generals to high ranking CSMs.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 2:48 pm to starsandstripes
quote:
Active duty folks are not firing on US civilians.
Nope
Posted on 1/28/18 at 2:59 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Retarded liberals always use the, "what are you going to do against a tank" argument.
Posted on 1/28/18 at 3:41 pm to starsandstripes
quote:
There is no weapon in possession of a civilian that scares me when sitting insdie of an armored vehicle
You do know 20mm anti tank rifles can be owned by civilians right?
This post was edited on 1/28/18 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 1/28/18 at 4:00 pm to starsandstripes
quote:
There is no weapon in possession of a civilian that scares me when sitting insdie of an armored vehicle. I will stare out the window while you fire round after round at the vehicle.
While this is true, you are still ridiculously outnumbered and a determined people can wait you out. Eventually you will have to come out of that armored vehicle. Plus they wouldn't have to pierce the armor. They would just have to disable the vehicle and that is really not that hard.
This post was edited on 1/28/18 at 4:05 pm
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News