Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: east1234
It would be easy enough to starve out the cities.

Food is actually the biggest advantage of the rural community. Aside from the obvious use of starvation as a weapon there are the secondary effects. If you try to move the farmers off the land, the city people starve. That doesn't mean they won't try it. The socialists did it in Russia, Zimbabwe, Cambodia and almost every other place they took over. And starvation in the cities always followed. In addition it limits their ability to use NBC's. After all who wants to eat food grown at Chernobyl. The cities need to capture the countryside in a usable state. The countryside just needs to destroy the cities. And anyone can tell you it is much easier to destroy than to govern a hostile population.
46 posted on 07/30/2010 10:05:31 AM PDT by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: GonzoGOP

True, but Russia, Zimbabwe, and Cambodia didn’t have a well armed rural population. There will be a sniper behind every blade of grass.


62 posted on 07/30/2010 10:45:39 AM PDT by east1234 (Cut, Kill, Dig and Drill!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoGOP
Food is actually the biggest advantage of the rural community. Aside from the obvious use of starvation as a weapon there are the secondary effects. If you try to move the farmers off the land, the city people starve. That doesn't mean they won't try it. The socialists did it in Russia, Zimbabwe, Cambodia and almost every other place they took over. And starvation in the cities always followed. In addition it limits their ability to use NBC's. After all who wants to eat food grown at Chernobyl. The cities need to capture the countryside in a usable state. The countryside just needs to destroy the cities. And anyone can tell you it is much easier to destroy than to govern a hostile population.

Your entire post boils down to the single fact that they need us but we don't need them. They would do well to be aware of that and act with appropriate deference now and it would prevent the entire SNAFU. If they don't, it still works to our advantage.

79 posted on 07/30/2010 11:38:07 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoGOP
It would be easy enough to starve out the cities.

Food is actually the biggest advantage of the rural community.

Actually, the rural areas would hold most of the cards. Oil pipelines, power lines and in some states aquaducts pass through rural areas and would be easy to cut off. The cities would be hellholes without food, water, power and sanitation.

Additionally, the rural population is much more self-sufficient and able to deal with adversity (witness Katrina).

141 posted on 07/31/2010 4:39:18 AM PDT by Senator_Blutarski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson