- 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: "Your guns won't be able to take on military tanks and drones"
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:53 pm to airlinehwypanhandler
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:53 pm to airlinehwypanhandler
quote:
Say a tyrant became president and ordered the military to attack innocent citizens.
I'm skeptical you'll ever see something like this in the US. I'm skeptical the military would obey something directly unlawful.
You can isolate individuals and communities right now, with legal justification, and never even use the military. The fractured American political landscape helps with this too, as even in the large tent parties, you have a wide variety of opinions, which means organizing across those different factions is incredibly difficult.
0
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:54 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
he odds of an active duty unit having any action in any one soldiers town is miniscule
well yes, but I would think most would react negatively to being ordered into ANY town in America to bring their tanks and air power and artillery to bear on citizens bearing small arms.
I just don't think the American military could be persuaded to fire on fellow citizens over a constitutional interpretation issue.
Now if there were roaming bands of militia raiding town centers and committing mass slaughter over large swaths of the American land that might be another thing -but this whole thing of crashing thru peoples homes to seize legal firearms is a bit of a reach.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:55 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
The government would stand exactly a 0% chance of defeating an insurgency in this country and it's got nothing to do with the what type of weapons one side or the other are carrying. Even if 100% of the military obeys the order, which is likely, the government still stands no shot.
This is correct, and it isn’t for reasons that people think.
An insurgency is asymmetrical warfare and usually a battle of attrition. What happens when an Abrams tank gets blowed up in Iraq?
Government makes another, using extremely intricate supply lines and manufacturing spread across the whole North American continent.
What happens if there is an insurgency blowing up train tracks, port facilities, factories, etc in the USA?
No more Abrams. Nothing to replace it with, and oh by the way, the US military only has a few divisions of them. They break just sitting in place.
Ditto for every other over-engineered, over-priced, overly complex manufacturing process, etc for every weapon system the US has.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:58 pm to TBoy
quote:
The military will follow orders. Next question.
Well over half of the men and women who comprise America's military were born and raised in the the same areas of the country they'd be ordered to attack. You're a damned fool if you believe they'd blindly follow that order.
quote:
Can the civil war fetishists on the right wing really win a civil war? No.
When the "right wing" (as you'd define them) comprise the bulk of your fighting force, yes, they could. Though a bloody stalemate is the most likely outcome.
This post was edited on 3/18/19 at 6:01 pm
Posted on 3/18/19 at 5:58 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
This is correct, and it isn’t for reasons that people think.
An insurgency is asymmetrical warfare and usually a battle of attrition. What happens when an Abrams tank gets blowed up in Iraq?
Government makes another, using extremely intricate supply lines and manufacturing spread across the whole North American continent.
The military also has to recruit during this time. Conscription during a civil insurgency would probably lead to some undesirable outcomes.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:00 pm to TBoy
quote:
sted by TBoy on 3/18/19 at 4:55 pm to GeauxxxTigers23 quote: The government would stand exactly a 0% chance of defeating an insurgency in this country and it's got nothing to do with the what type of weapons one side or the other are carrying. Even if 100% of the military obeys the order, which is likely, the government still stands no shot.
This guy is an idiot, the US miltary would be stretched way beyond its capability, heavily outnumbered and though it could win a pitched battle that would rarely occur, you are looking at disorganized guerilla attacks nationwaide, army units would be confined to bases only for years, morale would disintegrate, against even an armed and blended in militia of 10 million the US armed forces literally have less thst a 0 % chance of winning... to clear up confusion this was directed at low tboy
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:01 pm to northshorebamaman
Every forceful move the government would take to counter would only make the situation worse. It’s an unwinnable situation for the government.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:05 pm to Brazos
quote:
You are severely underestimating the will of the people when it comes to the right to bear arms.
My Dad, rest his soul, taught my brother and I from when we were small kids to never give up our guns. He told us to fight to the death and never give them up without a fight. He absolutely despised democrats and was an avid contributor to the NRA. He taught us that the government will, one day, try and take our guns and then the democrats will have us locked up in concentration camps. My brother and I were taught this from before we could even shoot. We both got BB guns at 5, shotguns for 8, high powered rifles by 14 and a pistol for graduation from high school. I know that my brother, uncles, cousins and even my sister won’t give up our guns. Ever.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:05 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
and that (roughly) the same percentage of the military would have elected those people.
You are clueless. Utterly, completely. Service members are overwhelmingly pro-gun, especially those in combat and combat support roles. The part of the military that does the actual trigger pulling would be the first to defect from any order attempting to confiscate firearms en masse. The remaining CSS folks wouldn't have the capability.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:06 pm to airlinehwypanhandler
Look to Afghanistan
Our soldiers are citizen soldiers and would probably have a hard time killing other citizens.
Our soldiers are citizen soldiers and would probably have a hard time killing other citizens.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:07 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
The OP's scenario ( For the sake of this example lets say the president ordered the military to attack citizens who refused to give up their guns in a gun grab) would be a clear unlawful order.
I had a slightly different take on his situation- something closer to Ruby Ridge or Waco.
My point being is that it's very easy to imagine a situation where intelligence is doctored to make soldiers believe they are doing the right thing.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:10 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:Fair enough but it would take some extraordinary doctoring to create a situation that would warrant the OP's scenario.
My point being is that it's very easy to imagine a situation where intelligence is doctored to make soldiers believe they are doing the right thing.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:13 pm to airlinehwypanhandler
quote:the vast majority I'm afraid. Are you under the impression soldiers think for themselves? They take orders. They will try to kill you and me when ordered.
How many military would actually obey the order?
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:14 pm to northshorebamaman
And how many times could they fake it? We’re talkinh dozens of hundreds of Waco’s. No politician wants another Waco or Ruby Ridge on his hands. Hell, we’re still talking about those today.
Fun control just isn’t happening in this country. The left uses gun control like the right uses abortion. It’s nothing more than a scare tactic that no one actually wants to do anything about. They just want to talk about it to rile up the base. Which incidentally is a stupid tactic because no one in America actually wants gun control.
Fun control just isn’t happening in this country. The left uses gun control like the right uses abortion. It’s nothing more than a scare tactic that no one actually wants to do anything about. They just want to talk about it to rile up the base. Which incidentally is a stupid tactic because no one in America actually wants gun control.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:15 pm to arcalades
quote:That would depend on what side you fall on in the OP's scenario.
They will try to kill you and me when ordered.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:15 pm to arcalades
quote:
the vast majority I'm afraid. Are you under the impression soldiers think for themselves? They take orders. They will try to kill you and me when ordered.
Don't know anyone in the military, huh?
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:16 pm to NYNolaguy1
Lol dude you clearly weren’t in the military. A well armed insurgency is the most dangerous enemy.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:17 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:Yep. Those two issues are way too valuable for pulling votes to actually solve them (if it's even possible to solve them).
The left uses gun control like the right uses abortion. It’s nothing more than a scare tactic that no one actually wants to do anything about.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:19 pm to airlinehwypanhandler
I served in the military, and i can tell you with 100% certainty that you may have 3-5% obey that order.
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:21 pm to Jumbo_Gumbo
quote:An order like that is more likely to trigger a coup than be followed.
I served in the military, and i can tell you with 100% certainty that you may have 3-5% obey that order.
Page 5 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News