I'm going to take this gun control argument

[Ma'ake]

Originally Posted by Venkman

I don't know. I think the average U.S. soldier would be a little more hesitant to brutally put down a rebellion of his own people.

*If* the insurgents are able to portray themselves as just good old patriots, I agree. If they appear as domestic terrorists, they're done. If military moms from Texas & Florida & all other states start losing sons in a protracted insurgency, the odds are in favor of the military, politically & emotionally, it seems to me.

I certainly don't intend to compare anyone on this board - or really, 99% of American citizens as a whole - to Tim McVeigh, but he was certainly fighting governmental "tyranny". (That's one of the things to be expected in a culture where so many consider government to be *the* enemy.)

One thing that complicates the notion of Americans toppling their own government is that so many Americans - of so many diverse & contradictory persuasions - consider the government to be the enemy, that the likelihood of a unified force seems pretty small, to me.

It seems far more likely that we'd have some smaller group of non-mainstream patriots rise up & be crushed, forever dooming any futher insurrections to terrorist status.

[Coach McGuirk]

Odds that CG is now being watched by CIA, FBI, Homeland security? Even, Betting is now open.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

You're presuming a unified uprising of 300 million? In the media age, how likely is this? (Who is out of their league?)

OK, let's throw out the AC-130s... how about the A-10 Warthogs? (The same aircraft the Air Force earlier retired...well... because they had to justify spending more money on newer planes). The A10 came out of retirement as a devastating tank-killer with a 30mm gatling gun up front.

After the A10s, let's talk about the Apaches, then the F18s, then the F16s. You get the point, it's a lot more hardware than 25 aerial gunships.

My sense is if an insurgency / civil war erupted on US soil, the gloves would come off much more quickly, the insurrection would be put down quickly. It's one thing to be fighting off in a foreign land, when your own soil & nation are at stake, the intensity gets turned up a few notches, me thinks.

In Iraq & Afghanistan we're not just fighting ruthless & crazy jihadists, we're trying to win the "hearts and minds" of a Billion people. (If we sought a purely military victory, it would have been done & over by now... with lots & lots of dead people.) In the case of a "terrorist" uprising here on American soil, a central (tyrannical) government would be much more focused on a comprehensive military victory and complete demoralization of the "enemy".

You forgot tomahawk missiles and nuclear bombs. LOL. You are seriously out of your league.

I will agree that we could commit genocide against the Iraqi people rather easily. Historically, this is the way you put down an insurgency.

But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about an occupying and controlling force.

Where are the insurgents? Who are they among the numerous faces? Who is cooperating with them? If I kill the people I *think* are cooperating with them, won't even more people turn against me?

We can't win against guys in freaking turbans and bath robes LIVING IN CAVES, and you think it's a piece of cake to take on and occupy America. YOU ARE AN IDIOT MY FRIEND.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Coach McGuirk

Odds that CG is now being watched by CIA, FBI, Homeland security? Even, Betting is now open.

Maake fundamentally doesn't believe in liberty, so he has no problem giving it up. This is the typical liberal/socialist viewpoint.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You forgot tomahawk missiles and nuclear bombs. LOL. You are seriously out of your league.

I will agree that we could commit genocide against the Iraqi people rather easily. Historically, this is the way you put down an insurgency.

But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about an occupying and controlling force.

Where are the insurgents? Who are they among the numerous faces? Who is cooperating with them? If I kill the people I *think* are cooperating with them, won't even more people turn against me?

We can't win against guys in freaking turbans and bath robes LIVING IN CAVES, and you think it's a piece of cake to take on and occupy America. YOU ARE AN IDIOT MY FRIEND.

While I don't disagree with your premise, I think the bathrobes and caves stuff is not very persuasive. In fact, the very nature of their lifestyle maeks it even easier for them to resist. Amercians are soft and many would be unwilling to endure the rigors of resistance. "Stop shooting at us or we will take away your cable TV." It would take a while for us to toughen up, or to have the non-tough be winnowed out.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by creekster

While I don't disagree with your premise, I think the bathrobes and caves stuff is not very persuasive. In fact, the very nature of their lifestyle maeks it even easier for them to resist. Amercians are soft and many would be unwilling to endure the rigors of resistance. "Stop shooting at us or we will take away your cable TV." It would take a while for us to toughen up, or to have the non-tough be winnowed out.

so you are making the argument that SU was mocking: that Americans couldn't resist an occupation because they are too soft.

Sad that youand Maake, fundamentally, don't believe in the power of the people, specifically Americans, to fight for their own liberty against an oppressor on their own land.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

*If* the insurgents are able to portray themselves as just good old patriots, I agree. If they appear as domestic terrorists, they're done. If military moms from Texas & Florida & all other states start losing sons in a protracted insurgency, the odds are in favor of the military, politically & emotionally, it seems to me.

I certainly don't intend to compare anyone on this board - or really, 99% of American citizens as a whole - to Tim McVeigh, but he was certainly fighting governmental "tyranny". (That's one of the things to be expected in a culture where so many consider government to be *the* enemy.)

One thing that complicates the notion of Americans toppling their own government is that so many Americans - of so many diverse & contradictory persuasions - consider the government to be the enemy, that the likelihood of a unified force seems pretty small, to me.

It seems far more likely that we'd have some smaller group of non-mainstream patriots rise up & be crushed, forever dooming any futher insurrections to terrorist status.

Sure, small uprisings would be crushed, but you were talking about a mass uprising. Much of our military is southern rebel against authority types. They're not about to supress a popular uprising against tyranny. A heavily armed populace itself is in and of itself THE deterrent against invasion or absolute gov't tyranny. THat's why socialists want the guns. They are against the individual and want no challenge by the individual to the state.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

so you are making the argument that SU was mocking: that Americans couldn't resist an occupation because they are too soft.

Sad that youand Maake, fundamentally, don't believe in the power of the people, specifically Americans, to fight for their own liberty against an oppressor on their own land.

Read what I wrote again, young padwan, and see if it makes a difference, because you got it all wrong.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Venkman

Sure, small uprisings would be crushed, but you were talking about a mass uprising. Much of our military is southern rebel against authority types. They're not about to supress a popular uprising against tyranny. A heavily armed populace itself is in and of itself THE deterrent against invasion or absolute gov't tyranny. THat's why socialists want the guns. They are against the individual and want no challenge by the individual to the state.

Well said.

My understanding is that the military's job is to protect the country and it's citizens, not to protect the government. If the citizens decide that the government is tyrannical, I'd guess that the military would be on the side of the citizens.

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by Coach McGuirk

Odds that CG is now being watched by CIA, FBI, Homeland security? Even, Betting is now open.

I know one agent who checks in now and again.