Don’t 53% have deserve it?
I doubt it. I doubt they’d be asked, either. Soldiers are mostly the same redneck good ‘ol boys that would theoretically be the ‘enemy’.
Ammo purchases are likely more about choking off the civilian market than actually acquiring the ammo for use.
SnakeDoc
We know it’s 47% + the government against the 3%
Funny. This article coming one day after the anniversary of Kent State.
“....they have Predator drones, spy satellites, and sophisticated online surveillance and communication systems.”
.
And a Congress that seems to support a tyrannical government.
Yes.
They have already appeared on several FR threads last year and said so.
Any flag-rank officer who might refuse such an order is being run out of DC on a rail, and replaced by those loyal the The Obama.
They will issue the order, and they will fire. Those who might refuse, are already out.
Response: Yes. That is why "The Divine One" is pushing for a Sodomite, weirdfemale, minority, noncitizen army. They will do his bidding as they owe their very being to him.
Comment: Now a question I have not seen posed: Will U.S. Citizens fire on the military?
There are more than 3 percent who will fight, and 40 percent who will support the fight, and they are concentrated in a contiguous block of states. We will need some brave governors and state legislatures to say "enough" at some point, and begin the preparation.
To me, the line is when they seek registration of the guns. Prepare for battle at that event. The fight begins when they come for those who don't comply. I hope we have a few states, most particularly Texas, who say no, and can form a base for resistance. If not, if we are few and scattered, it will be tough to mount anything, especially since they know who we are and where we are.
I'd like to see some state governors creating their own state militias. It is constitutional, and they do not have to permit the President to federalize them.
>> But three percent was enough.
3% was enough for fighting an enemy with a 2000 mile supply chain that had to cross a dangerous ocean in sailing ships.
Our enemy has a supply line that at his fingertips, along with all the armored motorized transport he needs.
If on the other hand, total war tactics are employed, things will get ugly pretty quick. Leftists/Socialists have always been thourough in their elimination of opponents. See Stalin, Mao, Kim Jung, etc.
Factor in the indoctrination attempts in the military whereby law abiding, God fearing, small government types are portrayed as the enemey and you now have a potential significant percentage of the military willing to shoot our fellow Americans....or apprehend.
Remember Ayers said it would take about 25 million casualties to bring about the change the Left wants. Think about that...25 million...and that was 40years ago. That number is more likely to be around 50-75 million now.
How many gun owners are in the U.S.?
Up here in the mountains if you cut off a rattlesnake`s head, his tail will wiggle n` rattle until sundown but he can`t bite no more.
A whole bunch of metrosexuals and gangbangers could vanish in the woodlands and swamps without leaving a trace.
When the Vietnam Legacy studies were done based on in depth interviews with veterans, combat veterans, and more specifically ground combat troops, it was learned that in a given firefight with the enemy, fewer than half of armed infantry troops actually fired on the enemy.
The rest faked it or just lay low till the fray was over. I believe that the average American troop is even less likely to fire on someone who is a neighbor, knows his neighbor, or knows him.
That is why I would expect to face not GI's but UN "peacekeepers." Hopefully they will be wearing their bright blue UN helmets, as that will provide a good target to sight in upon.
Appears to this observer that I recollect that the last time a tyrant tried to away our guns, a foreign nation came to our aid and bottled up the tyrant`s army and navy at Yorktown.
Lafayette! Where are you?
This is part of the problem and why a revolt may never get started. It is the "I" and the "me" or "my" part that would allow a slow, piecemeal dismantling of liberty.
Can a revolt succeed? Conventional tactics and guerrilla warfare does not go far enough. If it should come to an open revolt, that would mean it has been conceded that preserving the US as a military and economic power is not important. Once that concession is made, the potential to win by economic destruction becomes possible. Our economy is a fragile system of inter-dependencies. It just takes a little imagination to figure out how to exploit that vulnerability. If people know what to do and how to do it, the economy would be a basket case in just a few weeks.
The VC are not a good example as they had plenty of “outside” support and the South had its hand tied behind its back by the US and its own corrupt government. The Taliban certainly was armed initially by us and later, the Russian weapons they seized.
The USA is now in more of a civil war position. The problem here is that the South was very well trained and armed.
Buy guns for personal protection by all means but an all out war assumes a 45 - 55 split that is not in our favor. I don’t think the government has the strength yet to grab guns and open concentration camps. At least yet.
I am not sure at what point I would fight.
I do know someone who would have if he were still alive. My Father was a bit crazy. There is no doubt in my mind he would have fought before giving up his guns. I don’t know how he lived to 90 but he did.
Well, they did at Kent State.
I am one citizen that will shoot back!