If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fairbanks Daily Newsminer)   The reality of how the modern US will treat your well-armed militia and any fantasies of an uprising   (newsminer.com) divider line 86
    More: Obvious, Fairbanks, foreign exchange reserves, magic, Alaska State Troopers, rebellions, classical conditions, treating, psychological tests  
•       •       •

25795 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 11:03 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-01-09 09:15:25 AM
9 votes:

Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?


Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:

1.bp.blogspot.com

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are legitimate targets, and you are going to eventually make a mistake, and in a country with strong free speech protections, that mistake will be exceedingly costly. And it wouldn't necessarily be all that hard to encourage such mistakes by the use of conventional ruses.

Think hard about it: How many times have you heard about a drone being used against a wedding or other family gathering in Afghanistan? People in the US generally don't care that much because no one knows them, and the media can't get there to report on it. But imagine a drone strike on some teenagers partying in the woods, or a family camping, or some hikers. Imagine yourself looking at the images of a bombed out camper and the body of a kid lying there, covered in a sheet. Maybe his parents *WERE* planning something or actively fighting, but that kind of visceral image doesn't go over well in the United States.

So yeah, I can't imagine drone strikes in the US. It would be exceedingly counterproductive for any government to try it, it would confirm the paranoid suspicions of people like Alex Jones, giving them a mainstream audience and the ability to say "I *TOLD* you so!", and it would be tantamount to an admission that they already lost.

*In search mode, you can't focus in too closely. It's like looking through a soda straw if you use too much magnification, and at lower levels from a distance, the resolution is such that a deer, bear, or moose is going to be indistinguishable from a person. Is that group of blobs a squad of rebels, or some does bedded down?
2013-01-09 11:12:00 AM
5 votes:
So what you Fark pussies are saying is, "Hand over your guns now, because there's no way you can fight the government. If they want to take away your freedoms, they can and there's nothing you can do about it"?

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.
2013-01-09 11:44:24 AM
4 votes:
I find this thread extremely disturbing. It's pretty farking obvious after all the jubilant glee about state superiority from the limp wrists and bearded horn rimmed glasses wearing hipster freaks in here that they can't wait for the tiniest suspicion in order to justify the bloodshed of their non center left (or more radical) countrymen. Great Farking job, Lord of the Flies motherfarking swine.
2013-01-09 10:49:21 AM
4 votes:

vpb: I can't think of a single militia group that has even had the balls to put up a fight when the police took them down.


Maybe it's because the police don't try to go in guns blazing anymore.

FBI Critical Incident Response Group

Do you remember Ruby Ridge, or were you not born yet? Then almost at the same time Waco. The government farkED UP. THEY killed people, not the militia. Not the cult. The government did the dirty deeds. Thus it was that we the people realized there was some seriously farked up shiat going on and all the agencies had to do some housecleaning and re-organize their methods. Since then, we really haven't had any armed confrontations with militia groups that ended poorly because NEITHER SIDE wants that.

What violence in your soul are you projecting?
2013-01-09 09:43:54 AM
4 votes:

vpb: dittybopper: dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?

Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.

Good.  Investigating terrorists is what they do.  I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.


They can instigate people into taking actions that are illegal, providing all the support and material means necessary, and cultivating them to do so without stepping over the technical legal definition of entrapment. Without the money, support, and most importantly the cultivation, nothing would have happened.

It's like making friends with the withdrawn kid at school, encouraging him to stand up to imaginary bullies, pumping up his self-worth and saying he has to fight back to teach them a lesson, then when he finally asks if you can get him a gun, you give him a starter pistol so no one gets hurt.

You haven't stopped anything that you haven't created yourself.

I don't have a problem with the FBI/ATF/DEA/whoever monitoring people like that, but when they are pretty much the sole monetary, material, and ideological support for the alleged "terrorists", like they have been in the past, I'm really not impressed that they made us any safer. They just sucked in some poor sap with a big mouth, who more than likely would have just left it at that if the government didn't actively intercede.

I think the reason why they do that is that they don't have infinite resources. They can't just sit there and watch malcontents who just mouth off occasionally about how they hate gun control or the Great Satan America indefinitely. There is an institutional pressure to make a case so that they can make an arrest, which they can then use to justify their jobs and budget expenditures to Congress.
2013-01-09 09:26:55 AM
4 votes:

dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 640x480]

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are ...


I'd say that we've shown that we have no problem blowing up anything we think might be something we would want to blow up. That would include human-sized animals and random hikers. Most drones, however, are used to recon movements. We send in patrols to clean up those areas.

I think the whole dream some people have of fighting the government is pretty absurd.  For the most part, the population of this nation isn't anywhere near fired up or even capable of being fired up enough. The numbers of "resistance" types would be small and they would be characterized as terrorists. We have no problems sending in troops to shoot local terrorists. As long as elections still happen, TVs still work and internet porn is available, there will not be any revolution. Nobody will rise up, save small cells of crazy people (like today) and they will be squished out of existence rapidly.
2013-01-09 08:19:34 AM
4 votes:
What, a common criminal with a big mouth bragging about committing federal felonies (that weren't true, btw)? Meh.

We aren't close to requiring a "Second Amendment Solution" yet. We're still on the first couple of boxes. As long as we have the first 3 in working order, we don't have to resort to the 4th.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 08:16:54 AM
4 votes:
A psychological exam ordered by Cox's new attorney, Peter Camiel of Seattle, after he was convicted showed Cox suffered from several paranoid disorders.
"I put a lot of people in fear by the things that I said," Cox told the court Tuesday. "Some of the crazy stuff that was coming out of my mouth, I see that, and I sounded horrible.
"I couldn't have sounded any worse if I tried," he said. "The more scared I got, the crazier the stuff. I wasn't thinking, I was panicking."


I think this guy has several alts here on Fark.
2013-01-09 11:50:20 AM
3 votes:

HotWingConspiracy: You guys, the president that freed the slaves hated liberty. Read it on the internet.


He didn't free any slaves. He proclaimed (wholly ineffectually) to free the slaves in the territories they did not control, but not in the border states they did control.
2013-01-09 11:22:36 AM
3 votes:

ha-ha-guy: Ah this old one. The one where the American military military has overwhelming superiority and technology against any insurgency that could happen. Never mind Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq 2.0.

/plus you don't have to actually perform an insurgency, you know just pop the jackass who declares himself President for Life
//not that I support such actions or consider them the proper way to redress grievances, however to claim they are ineffective is deny facts


You know what all three of them had in common? A sugar daddy. The Vietnamese insurgency was funded by the North and supplied by the Soviets. Afghanistan had a steady supply of arms and money from Bin Laden and his network, as did Iraq 2.0

The French Resistance? Backed by the Allies.

Even the American Revolution relied on the French for arms, money, and it's Navy.

Logistics wins wars, not fervor.
2013-01-09 11:12:08 AM
3 votes:
All of this gun shiat is really getting on my nerves.

How about we skip the part where we argue about gun control, and just get right to the part where we do nothing?
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 09:49:24 AM
3 votes:

dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.


Actually it works pretty well.  There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.  The only reason we are still there is because there is no stable government there to had things over to.

But that's beside the point.  Successful rebellions like in Libya have popular support.

You don't.

There aren't enough of you to even involve the military, law enforcement will take care of you nuts.  You don't have the organization, the discipline, the equipment, the training or the dedication that the Taliban have.  Comparing "militias" to the Taliban is like comparing the Boy Scouts to the Army.

There have been individual survivalists who have fought it out with the police, but I can't think of a single militia group that has even had the balls to put up a fight when the police took them down.  Basically angry white men acting out violent fantasies.
2013-01-09 02:09:55 PM
2 votes:
Losing my 2nd amendment granted to me in the Bill of Rights scares me less than liberals who are not only OK with it, but seem to want it to happen, and are to farking naive to understand the consequences. That level of stupidity in the US scares me, I have a hard time understanding how we fell so far
2013-01-09 01:40:17 PM
2 votes:
I ♥ all of the references to the military might of the US here at home... you know... where very few soldiers are armed and those that are on armed guard duty typically only have a few live rounds in their magazine. It takes us months to outfit soldiers and deploy them to the two wars we are currently fighting, you know, those wars where quite a bit of our materiel is concentrated.

The weapons we DO have on our shores are kept in armories on bases. Bases are fairly open. The word "Fort" doesn't mean walls, moats, barbed wire, etc. anymore. It simply means that the DoD owns the land and the buildings there. If the shiat were to really actually hit the fan, do you honestly think that the US based forces could react in time to prevent determined armed militias from entering an un-guarded fort, breaking into the armory, and absconding with shoulder-fired guided missiles and anti-tank weapons? Then, when you've got enough of a following, what's to prevent you from taking tanks and other heavy weapons?

An actual armed uprising in the US wouldn't be some fudds with squirrel shooters, it'd be a well-armed blood bath for all involved regardless of the US military's level of technology. Syrian rebels didn't start out with full-auto weapons for all, but once they took a few armories, they started making great strides. Same went for the Libyans and most of the Serb-Croat war.

To bury your head in the sand and say "but predator drones!" is to fail at strategy by leaps and bounds.
2013-01-09 01:39:02 PM
2 votes:
There is never going to be a full-scale armed insurrection in this country.

Our system of governance is not perfect, but it is self correcting. When things get bad enough we eventually manage to gather up enough voters, fix the worst offenses and continue to move forward.

We don't need armed fighters for the cause because all we ever really need are voters. Or to put it a different way, get an afghani truly pissed at his government he picks up a gun or a bomb. Get an American truly pissed at his government, he gets his lawyer, his congressman, his senator, and as many other people as they can involved. It's a fundamental aspect of our culture. Despite appearances to the contrary, the vast majority of us simply no longer solve our problems with violence.

A free society is a noisy society, and the U.S. is as noisy as it comes. We look like we are at each others throats, that the center cannot possibly hold. But in the 21st century when the chips are down and shiat gets real, there is only one America. Try and keep that in mind when the pundit-monkeys are flinging poo everywhere.
2013-01-09 01:28:50 PM
2 votes:
I certainly don't believe that our current government is so horrible that a revolution is in order.

However, I also believe that an entire nation can be persuaded to allow its government to do horrible things by not being prepared to tell said government "enough".

Anyone who thinks our elected leaders would never do anything horrible enough to warrant an uprising is fooling themselves.
2013-01-09 01:07:57 PM
2 votes:
I still can't get past the idea that the "Government" is going to -- someday soon -- enact martial law and start forcing its citizens into camps or re-education facilities, or whatever these people believe.

Yeah, well, I lived the dream baby! In 1972 when Marcos took over the Philippines. I woke up that morning, and the streets were DEAD. Not a sound. The traffic din - gone. Turned on the TV and radio - nothing. No stations broadcasting. I walked down to the local food store - jammed with people, hoarding.

Up the street from our house, I got an excellent civics lesson for a 15 year old American boy - I watched from behind a tree as soldiers in a jeep drove up to a house and dragged a guy out to the jeep, wife and kids screaming, not a goddammed thing they could do about it. Never did find out if he made it back.

The sky is blue in the Philippines, just like here. The people there love, hate, cry, laugh, scheme, trade, goof off, just like us. One day their democracy just went away.

THERE IS NOTHING MAGICAL ABOUT AMERICA. WE ARE NOT IMMUNE.

What happened there can easily happen here. Elections can be canceled, guns can be rounded up, you and your neighbors can be dragged off (like the Japanese in WWII), None of that is impossible. You really need to think about how to defend yourself from that.

Hint: having "strong convictions and opinions" will be useless when the busybodies decide it's time to control you.
2013-01-09 12:40:44 PM
2 votes:
I don't know what's scarier: People with fantasies of armed militia launching a revolution against the government or people with fantasies of the armed forces slaughtering such a militia.

People need to just chill out for fark's sake. This country needs legalized pot in a big way.
2013-01-09 12:16:19 PM
2 votes:
Black people were treated horribly for the entire history of this country, still are to some degree. That treatment never even came close to stating mass armed resistance. Because even the terrible treatment they were subject to was better than fighting and dying during an armed revolt.

You think a 3% increase in taxes on the rich is gonna get people riled up enough to start an armed revolt? Confiscation of a small class of firearms? Gay marriage?

Even if it were possible to fight the government, and it's most assuredly not, a life of comfortable servitude is better than dying. Even the most worse off people in this country have it better than a guerrilla fighter. Just stop engaging the idiots who think any of this is possible.
2013-01-09 12:06:04 PM
2 votes:

dr_blasto: dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 640x480]

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are ...


One thing that always makes me curious is why, if someone brings up the fact the 2nd amendment is there to protect against a tyrannical government, do people jump all over them about having revolution fantasies? Is there an unbelievably exceedingly stupidly small chance my the time my Nieces are old that maaaaaaybe a revolution might possibly be necessary? Perhaps. Is that why someone like me brings it up when "Blah blah blah you don't need XXX for hunting so they should be banned"? Nope. I don't even pretend I need to be armed to fight the government, but it is EXACTLY why it was written.

I have no issues with you if you hate the Second Amendment and want it repealed either. There is a process for amending the constitution and it is there for a reason. What annoys me is when people decide to ignore the piece of paper this country was founded upon because they don't like certain parts. Live by it or change the damn thing. Don't pretend the 2nd is about hunting because you don't like semi-automatic weapons. Those are unrelated.
It's no different with the 1st Amendment. I despise the Westboro Baptist Church and everything they stand for, but banning them from saying what they want to say flies directly in the face of WHY the 1st amendment is there. It isn't there to protect speech you agree with, but speech you disagree with. Same thing, 2 amendments.
2013-01-09 11:38:31 AM
2 votes:

dr_blasto: dittybopper: Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

Apparently not really all that well, or we wouldn't still be in Afghanistan, and we didn't use them to win in Iraq: We co-opted the tribal leadership there (ie., it was old fashioned politicking, not high tech).

Or, to put it another way: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy things remotely is insignificant next to the power of ideology.

/I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Consider places like Afghanistan and Iraq, though: Mostly, they are desert-like areas, some flat, some mountainous, but generally with a very low amount of vegetation.

Now, this is not too far from where I live:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 640x480]

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

No, I don't think the use of drones would be a game changer in the way you think it would be. In my opinion, that would actually work against the government. You start dropping bombs or missiles in the United States, even on what are ...


Your argument is the exact same thing people said 250 years ago, and the same thing that people have said before every revolution. They always start out looking like an impossible tasks. revolutionist start out being a joke, then they are arrested, then hung for treason, then slaughtered in the streets, but if the movement ideoligies are there, then it will develop.

Keep in mind I am not saying this is happening now or not, just that the argument that "the government will win, so you don't need guns, and you don't need to try" is idiotic, and those people need to pick up a real history book. Study the day by day, how the revolutionary war started. Study how the Russion revolution started. There are books that describe in detail the exact events of a very few key days.
2013-01-09 11:28:47 AM
2 votes:

mark12A: Wow. 26 years for basically mouthing off, but not hurting a fly.


You can kill people and serve less time.

The government is extra-super-sensitive to people who do not respect their authoritay.

They'll probably put him in the deepest hole they have -- ADX Florence. That's where they put the ones that embarrass them.

Rule No. 1 of being in the Ruling Class: Maintain your position in the Ruling Class

Rule No. 2: Pretend to care about helping the people who aren't in the Ruling Class to the extent it helps serve the purposes of Rule No. 1.
2013-01-09 11:24:42 AM
2 votes:
Wow. 26 years for basically mouthing off, but not hurting a fly.

Interesting.

Soviets were pretty good at that shiat:

"Psychiatry of the Brezhnev period was used as a tool to eliminate political opponents ("dissidents"), people who openly expressed their views that contradict officially declared dogmas.[13]:17 In case the person did not agree with the specific actions of people in leading positions and criticized them by using philosophic dogmas according to the writings by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, the term "philosophical intoxication" was widely used to diagnose mental disorders.[13]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Sov i et_Union
2013-01-09 11:14:30 AM
2 votes:

vernonFL: [encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 196x257]
[www.lilligren.com image 447x331]


People tell me I have to join a militia to responsibly use my right to bear arms.
Then they get nitpicky because they think the militia I joined doesn't look like its up to the job.

/Most of the militia that make the news are just loud mouthed drinking clubs full of racists.
/On the other hand I've seen some scary looking guys that would make you want to double your local swat teams funding if you ran across them.
2013-01-09 11:14:05 AM
2 votes:
Ah this old one. The one where the American military military has overwhelming superiority and technology against any insurgency that could happen. Never mind Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq 2.0.

/plus you don't have to actually perform an insurgency, you know just pop the jackass who declares himself President for Life
//not that I support such actions or consider them the proper way to redress grievances, however to claim they are ineffective is deny facts
2013-01-09 10:20:14 AM
2 votes:

vpb: doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.

You sound experianced with these things.


I grew up in Pittsburgh. My father "worked" in the steel mills part time in high school, but that time was a huge labor dispute that eventually killed the industry. The agent provocateurs were not so easy to spot in a steel mill because all the men were athletic of frame, but they were always the ones who insisted on illegal activity first. If someone went from "Let's make a picket line." to "Let's beat the fark outta them scabs." you knew it a fed.
2013-01-09 09:55:24 AM
2 votes:

PacManDreaming: dittybopper: How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?

Imagine the government turning off communications and suspending the Constitution. They could kill children by the hundreds and who's gonna know about it? Say the wrong thing and you can disappear. You also couldn't communicate or coordinate with your fellow rebels because they'd be jamming all electronics.


Google my user name. I know more about the subject of electronic warfare than you do. You can't shut down all communications. The US government doesn't have the resources (though they wish they did!).

Even if they tried, you can't jam local communications because it would require wideband jamming over a huge swath of frequencies

Also, they wouldn't jam them for practical reasons: It's better to listen. You can't simultaneously jam and DF. Communications that don't happen can't be analyzed for connections, etc.

Besides which, legally the government can't prevent the news media from reporting on such things. Any government that tried would be in violation of the Constitution, and thus illegitimate.

And if you think you're gonna run and hide in the woods...brilliant idea! Because millions of other people don't have that same idea. Once everyone in the major cities have all their food run out and their water shut off, they'll probably be fleeing for the same areas you are after their cities are burned to the ground. Yep, the woods are a really good place to hide. Good thing the military hasn't ever heard of defoliants, either.

1. I'm not talking about a mass exodus from the cities in some sort of post-apocalyptic scenario. I'm talking about small groups of people. The sort of groups that can form, perform some action, and in the face of pressure, simply evaporate.

2. The profligate use of defoliants did not help us in Vietnam: Even in the Winter, when nature defoliates itself, you still have the problem of the tree trunks themselves, not to mention terrain features, and a snow cave would be very good at diffusing your infrared signature. Properly sited, it might even be largely invisible.
2013-01-09 09:47:12 AM
2 votes:

vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.


FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.
2013-01-09 08:26:39 AM
2 votes:
Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL
2013-01-09 07:36:01 PM
1 votes:
I'm late to the party, but wow, a lot of people in here are really excited about drone strikes on their fellow citizens.
2013-01-09 04:46:33 PM
1 votes:

Fubegra: Why does it always seem to me like the ones who complain most loudly about "jackbooted thugs" are the ones who want to wear the jackboots?


I;m still wondering why most of the gun owners are the ones being civil in threads like this but the people in favor of gun control are the ones wishing violence upon people who disagree with them.


Its like one side is more immature (or more mature depending on what side you are on I guess) than the other......
2013-01-09 02:48:48 PM
1 votes:

freetomato: Richard Marcinko


I admit, I lol'ed. Funny enough, my wife's next door neighbor in Fayettenam was the head of Delta when she was growing up. Her dad tells a good story of someone attempting to rob the house. Talk about the worst random decision ever!

But I digress.

You've been on base, and from your previous comments, you also know how lightly armed the whole base is. Sure, they're on higher alert than they were during, say, the Vietnam era, but not by much.

I remember my father telling me a story of being on duty out at Riley during the wintertime guarding some warehouse or another. It was frigid, the river had frozen over, and the coyotes on the other side decided it was high time to see what was available to eat on the side of the river where my dad and a couple of others were serving duty. Short of it was, they each had exactly 1 round in their rifle it resulted in some dead coyotes and a very, very angry NCO when they returned their weapons empty. He was a little less angry when they showed him the dead 'yotes they tossed in the dumpster, but still pissed off about the paperwork.

Regardless, we're talking about large, sprawling complexes with less than desirable security measures when it comes to the threat of force. Just compare the security at Fort Mead with the security at the NSA right next door. One has a fence and 100% ID checks, the other also has a fence and 100% ID checks and a dedicated security force monitoring all kinds of security surveillance (IR detection, seismic detection, etc) and big black SUVs with lots-o-guns inside at every entrance.

Like I said, if you're going to try to pass off a fake ID or just drive onto base, you're going to be SOL, but a forced entry would stand a chance given the lack of reaction by the MPs and the fact that the military no longer gives everyone a weapon.

I'm not saying that some little militia group is going to do this during peace time, but if there were an insurrection, it's not like the rebels wouldn't have the ability to get access if determined enough. The whole point of the argument was that all the guys saying "lol Drones rawk!" have no real idea of how rebellions get weapons. They cache whatever they can get their hands on prior to the outbreak, and then take the weapons of the regime the fight against as they hit bases and depots/dumps. Air superiority is an awesome game changer, so are shoulder-fired guided missiles.
2013-01-09 02:43:11 PM
1 votes:

dallylamma: jaybeezey: doczoidberg: All of this gun shiat is really getting on my nerves.

How about we skip the part where we argue about gun control, and just get right to the part where we do nothing?

Why do you hate "the children"?

Hell, a member of Congress got shot in the head and nothing changed.


Well, to be fair, "the children" are a far more likable class of people than "Congress"...
2013-01-09 02:11:00 PM
1 votes:
You guys don't get it. The right to bear arms in regards to the militia the founding fathers obviously meant the National Guard which was created 150 years after the Constitution was written. As far as arms, they founders meant it only applied to muskets - just like freedom of speech and press only applies to things printed with a printed press and written with a quill pen. Following the the same liberal logic, the right to private property and residences only applies to log cabins. I can't believe how stupid conservatives are for not realizing the Constitution is about granting rights to citizens and not solely about restricting the federal government. It is as if they don't have a 3rd grade reading comprehension level.
2013-01-09 02:05:57 PM
1 votes:
I wish these guys, LaPierre, Alex Jones and the other anti-reg absolutists would just start where they always end up:

"We need these things to shoot American soldiers and police officers."
2013-01-09 01:47:21 PM
1 votes:

ringersol: Asymmetric revolution in practice shakes out as 1.) the resistance wins by goading the government into hurting enough innocents that the army itself flips (Egypt, Tunisia). In which case you don't need 100 round magazines yourself. You just need enough armaments to cause incidents that demand retaliation. 2.) the resistance wins because they were aided directly by another State actor who has an interest in seeing the government destroyed/embarrassed (Libya, Syria, etc). In which case you don't need 100 round magazines yourself. You will be given anything you could conceivably use effectively. 3.) the resistance loses because they were stamped out before the Army hit their own personal limit as to how ruthless they were willing to be (Iran, Bahrain) and sympathizer support was insufficient.

In no scenario does it really matter what weapons you start with.


The existence of option 3 proves it matters what weapons you start with. A sufficiently armed group can survive long enough turn option 3 into option 1 or 2.

The Americans did so well in the Revolutionary War because they were sufficiently prepared at the start to win the battle for Boston, which put the British on their heels for the rest of the war.
2013-01-09 01:38:49 PM
1 votes:

LeafyGreens: Seems like a lot of True Patriots™ up in here ready to stand up to the mean ol' government!


If we are going to play the dichotomy game; seems to be quite a few that would also roll over and go quietly as our freedoms are stripped away from us.
2013-01-09 01:35:38 PM
1 votes:
Ennuipoet: "They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens"

It's amusing how they argue that they need 100 round magazines to keep the government in check. But when pressed, they claim the actual army would never fire on Americans.
So what are the 100 round magazines *for* if you'd never have to fight the military? Couldn't you resist the government with nothing more than your presence, if Americans wouldn't willingly stomp Americans?

Also: Yes, insurgencies can wage asymmetrical war on a superior opponent. But they don't *win*. They draw enough blood that the superior opponent loses interest and leaves. But how does that work when it's a *rebellion*? There's no "giving up and going home" when the fight's in your own back yard.

Asymmetric revolution in practice shakes out as 1.) the resistance wins by goading the government into hurting enough innocents that the army itself flips (Egypt, Tunisia). In which case you don't need 100 round magazines yourself. You just need enough armaments to cause incidents that demand retaliation. 2.) the resistance wins because they were aided directly by another State actor who has an interest in seeing the government destroyed/embarrassed (Libya, Syria, etc). In which case you don't need 100 round magazines yourself. You will be given anything you could conceivably use effectively. 3.) the resistance loses because they were stamped out before the Army hit their own personal limit as to how ruthless they were willing to be (Iran, Bahrain) and sympathizer support was insufficient.

In no scenario does it really matter what weapons you start with. You just need the opportunity to initiate your first few incidents to demonstrate to the government that you're worthy of retaliation and/or to demonstrate to sympathizers that you're worthy of the miniscule cost of some smuggled military gear. Your first few incidents will almost certainly involve the capture of non-trivial quantities of military gear *anyway* if you're going to have any hope of winning.

I mean, even the RED DAWN masturbatory fantasy starts from bows, hunting rifles and (iirc) the odd pistol, escalating through equipment *capture* to personal firearm parity with the occupying force. They didn't need a 100 round magazine at step 1. How big of a pussy are you, if even in your own paranoid fantasies you're powerless without one?
2013-01-09 01:22:04 PM
1 votes:

Catsaregreen: So what you Fark pussies are saying is, "Hand over your guns now, because there's no way you can fight the government. If they want to take away your freedoms, they can and there's nothing you can do about it"?

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


So be more like the founding fathers and beg the French to save your arses? Got it.
2013-01-09 01:21:56 PM
1 votes:
Yep, the gubmint is too big. Hand over everything pointy, lie down and take it up the rear.

Nice plan.

The article was entertaining to say the least.
I think Iraq and afghanistan pretty much sum up our military's ability to fight in insurgent war...let alone a "civil" one at that.
The military is not populated with hundreds of thousands of super soldiers, 99% of them are just like you and me. Many are there simply becasue they had nowhere else to go.

The government is not "evil", it's just big and blind. it just needs to be constantly reminded why it exists.
When the government starts thinking it's job is to regulate and legislate every facet of our lives, someone has to push back.
It's inevitable that our system will eventually destroy itself, we are on an unsustainable path, any moron can see that, but our "system" is so big and complex that it has taken on a life of its own beyond the consciousness of the individuals that comprise it.
We've got a few more generations left, but It's only a matter of time.
When food and fuel become our limiting factor some little third world country will most likely set off a nuke and most of the planet will be turned into a parking lot.
Aside from that happening, we'll most likely just continue to devolve following the path of Rome until we either simply collapse under our own weight while lawmakers bicker and fight, or China and the Koreas invade us for our arable land and natural resources.

So, if that happens, at least we won't have any scary black guns to defend ourselves with.. So that's nice.
2013-01-09 01:15:07 PM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: Gah.

Biden now saying Obama can act alone, bypass Congress to enact gun control.

Like a goddamn nightmare.


Yes...by executive order a "constitutional scholar" can take away civil rights.

We should all feel safer....especially since all our other rights are just a EO away from disappearing.
2013-01-09 01:12:14 PM
1 votes:
Gah.

Biden now saying Obama can act alone, bypass Congress to enact gun control.

Like a goddamn nightmare.
2013-01-09 01:08:34 PM
1 votes:

topcon: Only rednecks own guns. This is what people like this actually believe. And you make it extra classy by saying only rednecks join the military.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/in-gun-ownership- s tatistics-partisan-divide-is-sharp/
Link


But I thought all libs were pussies because we didn't own guns, couldn't possibly understand the allure and the power of them, and were too scared of guns to have one in our pussified homes?

It seems that there's a bunch of people who own guns are also just fine with having more restrictions put on them. Oh dear. That just doesn't fit the dialogue the NRA is looking for.
2013-01-09 12:52:06 PM
1 votes:
In case you thought you could use your Ar-15s against the red coats, this is what the UK and the rest of NATO will bring to help the legitimate elected government of our close ally the USA put down the redneck uprising of 2018 ....

www.military-today.com

www.globalnewspointer.net

www.enemyforces.net

static.guim.co.uk
2013-01-09 12:40:27 PM
1 votes:

Zeno-25: Ennuipoet: Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?

You'd think Americans would have a bit better appreciation for asymetrical warfare and insurgencies after what we've seen since 2001, but nope.


There's so much wrong with the idea that this would ever work. Lets just start with distance.

In America you're not projecting your power into some god forsaken hell hole that hasn't had a semblance of working government in 100 years. Most people are going to finger your group as trouble and call the cops when they see you unless something VERY crazy has happened. Even if they DON'T the shear amount of power we can exercise from the nation's combined airports and military bases would be absolutely farking STAGGERING compared to what you can do with 1 carrier. You could have 10,000 drones in the air over the US in a year if you really felt like it, we use fewer than 1000 of them in Afghanistan.

Wanna control a major city? Well fortunately you have a shiatload of helicopters and airfields and you've ALSO got the facilities to build as many more as you want right here without shipping them anywhere. No worries about refueling, our whole country is developed and actually has roads.

Frankly it also isn't like we're a conflict zone somewhere way out there. There aren't big stockpiles of semtex, REAL machine guns, and RPGs just lying all over the place in the continental US. You'd have to build your own AA shiat from scratch, and we all know how effective those goofy home-brewed Palestinian rockets are. That's what you're really looking at in an armed resistance against the US kind of situation. You're looking at Palestine.
2013-01-09 12:34:41 PM
1 votes:
FTA: Before he was sentenced, Cox broke down several times, grabbing tissues and fighting back tears. "I put myself here, with my own words," he said before pausing. "And I feel horrible about that."

F1984: 'Are you guilty?' said Winston.
'Of course I'm guilty!' cried Parsons with a servile glance at the telescreen. 'You don't think the Party would arrest an innocent man, do you?' His frog-like face grew calmer, and even took on a slightly sanctimonious expression.
2013-01-09 12:25:06 PM
1 votes:

doczoidberg: How about we skip the part where we argue about gun control, and just get right to the part where we do nothing?


if that's all you've got, than yeah let's do nothing.

I love that the people who bring only one solution to the table are the ones biatching the most about nothing getting done. Your solutions are usually poorly thought out, easily evaded by criminals, severely overreaching against innocent people, rooted in a lack of information about current laws, completely ineffective, or ALL of the above.

Maybe if you brought something more to the table than just more gun control, people would receive you better.

I'm going to bring nothing but sugar packets to the dinner table, then biatch and moan about how nobody wants to eat anything or say things like "how about we skip setting the table and just get to the part where we don't eat?"
2013-01-09 12:17:13 PM
1 votes:

lordaction: Stories like these are just liberal fantasies of seeing their political opponents killed. You can see the actual glee in these comments and in the article. As history has shown us, leftists want nothing more then to see those that don't agree with their politics killed.


Aspergers, eh?
2013-01-09 12:16:58 PM
1 votes:

Stinkyy: I find this thread extremely disturbing. It's pretty farking obvious after all the jubilant glee about state superiority from the limp wrists and bearded horn rimmed glasses wearing hipster freaks in here that they can't wait for the tiniest suspicion in order to justify the bloodshed of their non center left (or more radical) countrymen. Great Farking job, Lord of the Flies motherfarking swine.


Don't forget them using doublethink to pretend they aren't doing what they accuse their opponents of.
2013-01-09 12:06:37 PM
1 votes:
Does anyone remember what the old, pre-CAC military ID cards look like?  Around '94 I was at the guard shack on an Air Force base, waiting for VIPs to arrive so I could escort them.  The guard (civilian DoD rent-a-cop) showed me a stack of ID cards he'd confiscated.  On first glance they looked just like a military ID, hologram on the laminate and all.  When you looked real close, though, what looked like the DoD seal said, in tiny letters "Militia of the State of Georgia" or some such nonsense.  Why these assclowns felt the need to try to get on base, I don't know.  It's not like they could access any classified information or munitions storage areas or even get on the flightline.  To shop at clothing sales, the BX or the commissary doesn't seem worth it either.  I guess they were just trying to see if they could pull it off.

FWIW they were all old, fat, white, rednecky looking guys.
2013-01-09 12:06:10 PM
1 votes:
Stories like these are just liberal fantasies of seeing their political opponents killed. You can see the actual glee in these comments and in the article. As history has shown us, leftists want nothing more then to see those that don't agree with their politics killed.
2013-01-09 12:05:16 PM
1 votes:
If the Apaches and drones start blowing shiat up, and the entire infrastructure is shut down, and it becomes apparent that the little pop-gun Rambo squads have no hope of winning a conventional "war", what do you think they'll do?

My guess is start taking the rest of us hostage and resorting to "human shield" tactics. So it's time to arm ourselves...against the militias.
2013-01-09 12:00:06 PM
1 votes:

AccuJack: Aside from actual shooting, there would be huge casualties from resistance fighters. Imagine every time a soldier stopped at McDonald's there was a chance they'd get something toxic but slow acting in their burger


That's already happening.
2013-01-09 11:58:19 AM
1 votes:
Cripes, a lot of the people here must ride the short bus. Sorry, that's insulting the developmentally disabled.

If you read specific, non biased accounts of most of the so-called "militias", you'll find that they share a lot in common with religious fundamentalist groups and political parties... qualities like self identification with the group as a basis for self worth, a distorted view of the world providing a fertile environment for their cause, and delusions of grandeur regarding their eventual goals.

That said, in a a real "uprising", firearms as currently owned by private citizens in the US would serve only one real function except for certain specialized models... that function being to shoot a uniformed soldier and take his weapons.

The fantasy of a group of citizens armed with weapons currently legal for private ownership being anything more than a speed bump to a professional army on the battlefield is just that, a fantasy. However, anyone who's studied history knows that that's a really dumb way to run an uprising. We Americans actually pioneered guerilla warfare during our own revolutionary war.

As the US government found out in Vietnam, it's hard to fight an enemy that can hide in plain sight. If the government ever chose to fight its own people, it would actually lose fairly quickly unless the rebels were idiots like this guy. That's because aside from convincing soldiers to fire on their own neighbors (or families) they would be fighting veterans FROM THEIR OWN ARMED FORCES who were discharged from service.

These veterans would know all the tactics, procedures, and behavior of the military (and possibly some of the actual soldiers). Also, they'd be fighting a massive 5th column from within their own organizations and infiltrators from the general population who "join up" after things start off. There would probably be enough sympathizers still in the federal army and enough infiltrators that any large (several thousand minimum) group of rebels attacked by the govt. would rapidly acquire military grade weapons. There are arsenals spread all over after all, and in the event of an uprising more weapons would be shipped in.

Aside from actual shooting, there would be huge casualties from resistance fighters. Imagine every time a soldier stopped at McDonald's there was a chance they'd get something toxic but slow acting in their burger, or whenever they stopped for gas on the road someone stuck a grenade in their truck's fuel tank.

A popular uprising in the US would be a nightmare, but it wouldn't happen at all like this lunatic thinks it would, nor most of the people commenting here (seriously, you guys sound like you're talking about a football game or something).

Which is why I'm not too concerned about a ban on "assault weapons" happening in the near future, other than the fact that it's a waste of time and pulls effort away from fixing the real problem. I'm sure the most effective weapons for me to use in case of uprising will still be available... a 12 gauge pump for short range work and a quality bolt action with a good scope for sniping.
If I'm ever concerned I'll be targeted by a drone, I'll make sure to wear camouflage... something from LL Bean or Land's end should do... while I stroll down main street next to the army base, performing reconnaissance for the next strike and looking darn good while doing it.
2013-01-09 11:54:26 AM
1 votes:

Catsaregreen: So what you Fark pussies are saying is, "Hand over your guns now, because there's no way you can fight the government. If they want to take away your freedoms, they can and there's nothing you can do about it"?

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


That's pretty much I got out of the first 50 posts.
2013-01-09 11:54:25 AM
1 votes:

lakmep: You do know that the Gov prints your money right?


Government control over printing of money only matters when you agree to follow that government. Anyone can print money.

What matters in wars is control of real assets. Waging a war against domestic citizens would be an instant economic disaster for the US government.
2013-01-09 11:53:19 AM
1 votes:

Catsaregreen: So what you Fark pussies are saying is, "Hand over your guns now, because there's no way you can fight the government. If they want to take away your freedoms, they can and there's nothing you can do about it"?

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


Perhaps, but you kind of did it to yourselves when you insisted we have the largest and most powerful military in the history of the world and gave them virtually unlimited funds to become as such. Kind of made your bed with that one conservatives.
2013-01-09 11:51:19 AM
1 votes:
If this guy had had access to mental healthcare before his crazy got him arrested, he might be a happy, productive person for the next 26 years instead of a number in a cell.
2013-01-09 11:48:04 AM
1 votes:
The idea that evolution needs to be violent is a homo erectus meme.

Want to shut it all down?
Strike.
Just stop buying everything.

Gandhi got it right.

Rifles? Even T.E. Lawrence knew it was stupid to go against conventional forces with conventional tactics. Remember who he taught this to? The Arabs.
Doh!

/The 2nd Amendment does not mean what most of you think it means.
2013-01-09 11:46:15 AM
1 votes:

MayoSlather: There is a difference between currency and resources. They don't need cash especially if they can print their own or simply take the resources they need.


The Confederacy tried to print its way through a war. The burst of printing makes things look good for a few days or weeks, then inflation takes over.

Besides, invading governments and militaries cannot run an economy. They can steal stuff, but that only lasts for so long. Taking resources by military invasion is not a long-term economic solution.

The US government can't even afford Medicare. It cannot afford a domestic war, largely because it would be waged against the people they need to pay for its wars.
2013-01-09 11:44:57 AM
1 votes:

Fubegra: FTFA: "I put myself here, with my own words," he said before pausing. "And I feel horrible about that."

Translation: "I'm sorry I got caught."


Everything happens for a reason. But sometimes that reason is that you are stupid and you make bad decisions.
2013-01-09 11:42:54 AM
1 votes:
A second american revolution would have to be a war of attrition. basically IEDs and assassinations. lots of 'terrorist' style actions. it would only succeed with a sizable majority(70-80%) of the population sympathizing with the goals of the resistance or, a decent sized majority(50-60%) and some defected military units.

since it wouldn't be geographically split, it wouldn't make sense to wage total war on the insurgents, as all you would do is make new enemy soliders by killing civilians, possibly ones who would otherwise be on the side of the government. And you destroy the infrastructure that your own country and military needs to function.

In this scenario the small arms don't really matter, you can conduct raids and assassinations in a guerrilla fashion with a 1903 springfield, a M1 garand, or an m16a4 with pretty equal efficiency.

you aren't going to win an engagement with an army division, so the solution is not to get into one.
2013-01-09 11:42:51 AM
1 votes:

Evil Twin Skippy: Show of hands, how many of you out there are furiously masturbating to the idea of our civilized world plunged into a Mad-Max grade hell hole?

Ok, that's what I thought.


I don;t think they are masturbating to that idea......killing all gun owners or wishing pancreatic cancer upon them, maybe.

Look at how gleeful people were in the FPS Russia guy thread.
Yet firearms owners are the ones who want to perpetrate violence upon others....wierd shiat that is.
2013-01-09 11:35:45 AM
1 votes:

Nem Wan: Constitutionally, the president is allowed to suspend habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or invasion


No, only Congress can. Ex parte Merryman.

Lincoln purported to do it anyway, then got biatch-slapped by Justice Taney, so Lincoln (the great respecter of liberty that he was) then promptly turned around and tried to get Taney arrested.
2013-01-09 11:34:34 AM
1 votes:

Xlr8urfark: And rebellious snow bunnies!


img3.etsystatic.com
2013-01-09 11:33:10 AM
1 votes:
These weirdos talk a pretty tough game until the government actually shows up. Then they don't even fire a shot and cry at their trial.
2013-01-09 11:25:39 AM
1 votes:
ITT a bunch of folks who don't understand the nature of guerrilla insurgencies.

If you are imagining a pitched battle between a ragtag militia and the US military, that will never happen.
2013-01-09 11:24:30 AM
1 votes:
It's not the noise makers the gov. has to worry about. Those guys are fools.
2013-01-09 11:20:21 AM
1 votes:

Catsaregreen: So what you Fark pussies are saying is, "Hand over your guns now, because there's no way you can fight the government. If they want to take away your freedoms, they can and there's nothing you can do about it"?

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


growlersoftware.com
2013-01-09 11:20:18 AM
1 votes:

Catsaregreen: Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


You mean the ones that sent armies against US citizens? Those founding fathers?
2013-01-09 11:20:10 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper:

How easy do you think a drone is going to have finding a small group of people in that? What if they disperse? How are the drones going to distinguish the infrared signatures of human-sized animals from humans?* How are you going to distinguish them from normal hikers? What will happen the first time you wipe out a bunch of innocent people hiking with a bomb or missile from an MQ-9 Reaper because they were mistaken for legitimate targets? What if it was a group of Cub Scouts? What if so-called "militias" take to dressing like hikers, hiding their guns in their packs or other normal hiking equipment except for when they are being actively used? How will you know who the target is?


The US will react the same way as they do in those nifty middle eastern countries. Everyone is a target. That's what you get for living in a warzone.
2013-01-09 11:18:43 AM
1 votes:
At the end of the trial in June, Bryan said he wrote down observations about Cox, which included: paranoia, grandiosity, narcissism, egocentricity and pathological lying.

Sounds like he should have been elected to the House of Representatives.
2013-01-09 11:17:59 AM
1 votes:
At the end of the trial in June, Judge Bryan said he wrote down observations about Cox, which included: paranoia, grandiosity, narcissism, egocentricity and pathological lying.

Then the judge attached the following image to his notes.

cdn.inquisitr.com
2013-01-09 11:14:47 AM
1 votes:

PacManDreaming: Meh, if there was a major uprising, all the government would have to do is turn off the electricity, water, communications and have grocery suppliers stop all food deliveries. ....



tax refund check wasn't delivered by the post office? What do you mean the bank won't cash it? Wait, walmart is out of stock on ammo anyway? Damn my brilliant plans for revolution have failed.

Should read more Les Miserables and less Atlas Shrugged.
2013-01-09 11:11:50 AM
1 votes:
Fringe militia groups.

Yep, this is what all gun owners think like.
2013-01-09 11:11:44 AM
1 votes:
FTA:
"Some of the crazy stuff that was coming out of my mouth, I see that, and I sounded horrible.

Over the next 26 years, they're be some crazy stuff coming IN your mouth.
2013-01-09 11:07:32 AM
1 votes:
I still wanna know where all these Tyranny-Fighters were during the Bush 43 administration....yeah, that's what I thought.
2013-01-09 10:36:09 AM
1 votes:

vpb: Actually it works pretty well.  There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.  The only reason we are still there is because there is no stable government there to had things over to.


It works well? So what would happen to me, as a westerner, if I were to wander too far out of the Green Zone in Kabul? Would the US assign a drone to watch over me? And how would that drone protect me, by dropping a bomb on the people who killed or kidnapped me when it's too late?

No.

I'm going to make a prediction: If we ever leave Afghanistan, within 5 years, or 10 at the most, any government that we set up will have fallen. The Taliban have relatively widespread support in large swaths of the country, and it's harder for us to co-opt the tribal leadership in Afghanistan than it was in Iraq because the tribal leadership in Iraq were honest crooks: They stayed bought.
2013-01-09 10:07:04 AM
1 votes:

vpb: Successful rebellions like in Libya have popular support.

You don't.


I'm not rebelling, nor would I in all but the most dire "loading people into cattle cars to camps" scenario: I've got a job, a family, and a house. Too much to lose.

No, you don't have to worry about me. This is just an intellectual exercise for me, kind of like the thread where I was talking about how Argentina could invade the Falklands: I'm not Argentinian, nor am I British, or even in the military anymore, just an interested observer.

The people you have to worry about are the ones who like shooting, have combat military experience, and are mostly unattached and/or don't have deep roots in any particular community, and who hold extreme ideological views*. Those are the ones you have to watch out for, from a practical standpoint, because those are the ones with a track record of actually *DOING* things.

Problem is, they tend to do stuff on their own, or with at most the help of one or two others, so finding them and stopping them before they do something is a real practical problem.

*Some might claim that I hold such views, I suppose, depending on their viewpoint, but really I don't consider them such: Many of the laws regarding firearms are quite legitimate, and I don't have a problem with, for instance, requiring a license to carry concealed in public or for hunting purposes. What I have a problem with are laws that make it as difficult and expensive as possible just to own, say, a handgun, in order to discourage their ownership, or in the banning of modern rifles or modern ammunition or ammunition feeding devices.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 09:51:46 AM
1 votes:

Ennuipoet: dr_blasto: I think the whole dream some people have of fighting the government is pretty absurd. For the most part, the population of this nation isn't anywhere near fired up or even capable of being fired up enough. The numbers of "resistance" types would be small and they would be characterized as terrorists. We have no problems sending in troops to shoot local terrorists. As long as elections still happen, TVs still work and internet porn is available, there will not be any revolution. Nobody will rise up, save small cells of crazy people (like today) and they will be squished out of existence rapidly.

This.  Good grief this.  Frankly, the general population would care less about these small cells and when they have popped up no one cared when the government wiped them out.  The Derp Corp seems to forget they are a tiny minority and what they preach is actually against the law.  A few days of news coverage and then back to Honey Boo Boo.


Or they snap when they realize how insignificant and impotent they are and shoot up a school.
2013-01-09 09:49:19 AM
1 votes:
Good luck with the fantasy.

It is interesting to think of a bunch of folks, who have paid taxes, who have records, who people know in their own counties, might magically escape notice. Notice enough to set themselves up as a revolution against one of the strongest militaries in the world--especially given that the fastest growing groups on terrorist watch lists have been paramilitary "militias" and this was under GW's watch.

You want to see how "ineffective" your government is? Try lobbing a bunch of grenades at it and calling for others to do the same. All of your goodies cost money, need to be maintained, and yes, Virginia, your local law enforcement probably knows where you yahoos go to pop off rounds and play soldier, and you hurt folks, all amusement will disappear...
2013-01-09 09:27:43 AM
1 votes:
Meh, if there was a major uprising, all the government would have to do is turn off the electricity, water, communications and have grocery suppliers stop all food deliveries.

Or, if they just wanted to be dicks, they'd roll the armor out. I'd imagine the first Rambo-wannabe that found out his high-powered .22 AR-15 didn't worked very well against an IFV would crap his intestines out.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, there's also a good chance that the military could run into the same problems the Soviets did in Afghanistan with the Mujahideen. Guerrilla warfare would be the norm as most people would figure out real quick that you don't want to go toe to toe with the US military.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 09:10:52 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equipped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL

That's not the paradigm now. it's just that some people haven't gotten the message.


That's pretty much the typical terrorist fantasy. These guys only associate with others like them and don't realize how few people share their ideas.

Not to mention the fact that they don't even have the balls to resist arrest, which tells you that they would piss their pants and cry like little girls if they ever had to face combat troops.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 09:04:49 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?

Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.


Good.  Investigating terrorists is what they do.  I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.
2013-01-09 08:33:43 AM
1 votes:

Mike_LowELL: Step 1: Perform military exercises out in the woods, preparing to take on a fully-trained, trillion-dollar-a-year fighting force with fully-trained, well-equpped soldiers that will not only has absolute air superiority with tactics synchronized through satellite and computer communication, but will eventually be able to employ robots which take human casualties out of the equation.  This way, if the government comes after your freedoms, you'll be ready to take them on.
Step 2: ROFL


I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.

Farking 21st Century technology, how does it work?
2013-01-09 08:22:26 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: (that weren't true, btw)?


Well, some may have been.

Still, I wonder how much of it was instigated by the government. It's pretty much well known that if you claim to be part of some militia organization, the FBI is going to actively attempt to infiltrate that group. They've been doing that since the 1990's.
 
Displayed 86 of 86 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report