Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The gun nuts are DELUSIONAL... [View all]OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)5. You clearly understand nothing of asymetrical/guerilla warfare.
Please explain how a bunch of people living in mud/shit huts has been able to thwart two superpowers with no standing army?
I've explained it before, but here (just for your edification):
If you want to control a population with force, at some level you need to "control the streets". The people and neighborhoods and streets need to be controlled. Businesses don't run themselves, money doesn't do anything without people to work with it, and cities aren't valuable without their people in compliance. Governments and nations are built in a pyramid scheme, and without the populace, the rest of the governments sitting atop the people falters.
Your OP ignores the end game of a tyrannical government. The fact that the government has tanks, planes, nukes, and ships is irrelevant. They will not help to control a population at the street level. Those items only serve to make America stronger because we evidently don't give a shit if OTHER countries cities get destroyed... that's not our problem. I fail to see how the US destroying it's own infrastructure is productive to itself. You don't control millions of people in a city by destroying it. We're not talking about little pop-guns defeating a Soviet nuclear strike or anything.
At some point, to maintain or establish government control over The People, government boots will have to hit the ground. And what awaits government forces in the public jungle? Nearly 300,000,000 firearms owned by an estimated 80,000,000 people. If only 10% of gun owners are, as you claim, stupid enough to resist our Armed forces... they would STILL outnumber US ground troops 8 to 3. And the resistance fighters would look American, speak American, be smarter and more educated than other countries/enemies previously faced, and blend in to the rest of society 100%. The collateral damage would be so severe in such a campaign, that more enemy resistance would be created than destroyed with each military action.
If you doubt this is the case, look at Afghanistan. I'm currently stationed in Afghanistan as I type this. These are people who have little infrastructure, they live in mud/shit huts (the ones who aren't lucky enough to find enough trash and nails to construct a hard shelter), an have AKs and other remnants of 1960's technology Cold War souvenirs. Sure, we bombed the shit out of Afg to kick off this campaign. We tossed their fucking salad with billions of dollars of missiles, rockets, bombs, and jets. And what happened when it came time to actually take control? Ten years... over ten years they've resisted the Armed Forces of the most technology advanced and powerful military empire the world has ever known. I have little doubt that our Nation's millions of guns can adequately protect it from it's own government.
Your OP ignores the end game of a tyrannical government. The fact that the government has tanks, planes, nukes, and ships is irrelevant. They will not help to control a population at the street level. Those items only serve to make America stronger because we evidently don't give a shit if OTHER countries cities get destroyed... that's not our problem. I fail to see how the US destroying it's own infrastructure is productive to itself. You don't control millions of people in a city by destroying it. We're not talking about little pop-guns defeating a Soviet nuclear strike or anything.
At some point, to maintain or establish government control over The People, government boots will have to hit the ground. And what awaits government forces in the public jungle? Nearly 300,000,000 firearms owned by an estimated 80,000,000 people. If only 10% of gun owners are, as you claim, stupid enough to resist our Armed forces... they would STILL outnumber US ground troops 8 to 3. And the resistance fighters would look American, speak American, be smarter and more educated than other countries/enemies previously faced, and blend in to the rest of society 100%. The collateral damage would be so severe in such a campaign, that more enemy resistance would be created than destroyed with each military action.
If you doubt this is the case, look at Afghanistan. I'm currently stationed in Afghanistan as I type this. These are people who have little infrastructure, they live in mud/shit huts (the ones who aren't lucky enough to find enough trash and nails to construct a hard shelter), an have AKs and other remnants of 1960's technology Cold War souvenirs. Sure, we bombed the shit out of Afg to kick off this campaign. We tossed their fucking salad with billions of dollars of missiles, rockets, bombs, and jets. And what happened when it came time to actually take control? Ten years... over ten years they've resisted the Armed Forces of the most technology advanced and powerful military empire the world has ever known. I have little doubt that our Nation's millions of guns can adequately protect it from it's own government.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
111 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's amazing how many times I encounter this kind of delusion with gun folks...
CTyankee
Jan 2013
#79
Contrary to your fantasies, the rank and file military would not blindly follow orders to shoot
Undismayed
Jan 2013
#92
A drone flying at 1000ft can target you & kill you, and you wouldn't even know it's there.
baldguy
Jan 2013
#91
No, in their Turner Diary, die-hard-like imaginations, they just hold off the blue helmets...
Bucky
Jan 2013
#4
Does your reading of the 2nd amendment include the right to bear car bombs and other IEDs?
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#8
Yeah, if you find someone building one, arrest em, fair trial, and jail time.
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#62
Irrelevent. Car bombs & IEDs are illegal here and illegal in the US.
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#14
"Do you really think that the US would start dropping bombs on buildings ..."
FiveGoodMen
Jan 2013
#40
Illegally, and not covered by the 2nd am. Find someone doing it? Lock em up. nt
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#61
The old "why have any laws at all, then, because some people will still break them" canard.
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#81
Right. How well did that work out for Randy Weaver or David Koresh, for example?
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#72
You clearly dont understand the idea of a tyrannical government with the USA's weaponry
stevenleser
Jan 2013
#19
They kicked us out like Japan kicked us out. Like Germany kicked out USSR, US, UK and France
stevenleser
Jan 2013
#18
Not only do I know that, I can name them without looking that up. It doesnt change the point. nt
stevenleser
Jan 2013
#88
I'm not insecure. I'm just tired of folks on your side of the argument shooting kids.
Robb
Jan 2013
#50
Isn't this considered treasonous to advocate to overthrow the govt because you don't like
kimbutgar
Jan 2013
#66
I'm perplexed by DUers telling other DUers that the US Government is going to send all four branches
cherokeeprogressive
Jan 2013
#90
And how useful were fighters and bombers and artillery during the occupation of Iraq?
krispos42
Jan 2013
#99
I'll bookmark this so I can check if North Vietnam's surrendered a year from now. n/t
Glaug-Eldare
Jan 2013
#102