We French can speak of surrender because it is the USA that has gone soft. You voluntarily surrender your rights in exchange for feeling safe.

The history books will write of "vietnamization" in Iraq and Afghanistan due to lack of fortitude at home. Meanwhile France jumped into civil wars in Libya and Mali and cleaned those messes up.

Cut social security by 1 euro in France and there are nationwide strikes and protests. Do the same in the USA and "The Bachelor" will still be a bigger topic.

The cheese eating surrender monkeys now eat American gubment cheese.

HockeyDad wrote:

Kind of like what happened in the Civil War ?

🌫

jetblasted wrote:

The Constitution is disposable. It's been "improved" so many times, it will eventually just be thrown out.

So don't worry about it and trust the federal government. They'll make a new and improved one.

8trackdisco wrote:

Or just defer to the UN one world.

Gene363 wrote:

First they control the words, then they control the meanings.

If everyone in the world had to vote a thumbs up or down on our federal government, I wonder if the Pr0-Feds would be able to garner 5%.

8trackdisco wrote:

Lots of hypothetical hogwash floating through this thread about "The People" rising up against the gubmint. As if someone would expect that those with the most extreme views that would likely "take up arms" first against the gubmint, would at that time represent the views and interests of all, a majority, or even a substantial minority of "The People". It would certainly take a lot more actual, not hallucinatory, tyranny from the gubmint to spark a substantial majority of "The People" to armed revolt. So all the theoretical hogwash about armed insurrection or threat of same being an effective means to keep the gubmint in line in this day and age is pretty much the delusional excreta of an extreme minority that are just pissed their political party or point of view isn't supported by the established political process.

The tree of hogwash must periodically be nurtured with the manure of message boards.

pdxstogieman wrote:

Lots of hypothetical hogwash floating through this thread about "The People" rising up against the gubmint. As if someone would expect that those with the most extreme views that would likely "take up arms" first against the gubmint, would at that time represent the views and interests of all, a majority, or even a substantial minority of "The People". It would certainly take a lot more actual, not hallucinatory, tyranny from the gubmint to spark a substantial majority of "The People" to armed revolt. So all the theoretical hogwash about armed insurrection or threat of same being an effective means to keep the gubmint in line in this day and age is pretty much the delusional excreta of an extreme minority that are just pissed their political party or point of view isn't supported by the established political process.

The tree of hogwash must periodically be nurtured with the manure of message boards.

pdxstogieman wrote:

We French can speak of surrender because it is the USA that has gone soft. You voluntarily surrender your rights in exchange for feeling safe.

The history books will write of "vietnamization" in Iraq and Afghanistan due to lack of fortitude at home. Meanwhile France jumped into civil wars in Libya and Mali and cleaned those messes up.

Cut social security by 1 euro in France and there are nationwide strikes and protests. Do the same in the USA and "The Bachelor" will still be a bigger topic.

The cheese eating surrender monkeys now eat American gubment cheese.

HockeyDad wrote:

True that America has too many sheeple . . . .

But the French calling the Americans soft?

Where are my freedoms fries?

Brewha wrote:

Don't like being called soft......why don't you ask your government to do something about it. You already surrendered your rights because the risk was greater than the reward.

Want some freedom fries? Perhaps your government will give you some if it doesn't deem them to be too unhealthy for you.

In the meantime, why don't you just sit down and knit me some nice wool socks and fix me a sammich!

HockeyDad wrote:

I think someone has had a little too much Grey Poupon . . .



HD, don’t spin in your Bordeaux. How you confuse laws that govern and protect a society as a loss of rights, points to the same kind of overly simplified and not thought out ‘small government ‘ crap I hear all the time. And it’s nothing but whining.

Despite all your rage, you’re still just rat(atouille) in a cage.

Brewha wrote:

HD, don’t spin in your Bordeaux. How you confuse laws that govern and protect a society as a loss of rights, points to the same kind of overly simplified and not thought out ‘small government ‘ crap I hear all the time. And it’s nothing but whining.

Despite all your rage, you’re still just rat(atouille) in a cage.

Brewha wrote:

I think that the military is made up of a lot of the "good ol' boys" we speak of. The vast majority are conservative thinkers.

I'd like to believe that if the gov't ever tried to use the military against its own people, they wouldn't comply.

MACS wrote:

I think that was explicitly stated, we would be dependent on disobedience within the military...

That is significantly different from the original concept behind the 2nd amendment, where the people would be a force more powerful than the military.

As for numbers, remember, not all gun owners have the same purpose. An "uprising" would only constitute a certain percentage of all gun owners. Addiiotnally, they would need to all communicate together to organize. that cuts down the percentage as well. Given established communication, command/control structure within the existing military, and extensive capabilities to deploy around the nation, kill rates of military to civilian uprisings would be absolutely outstanding... They would have the ability to drop overwhelming force wherever necessary, pull it back and deploy it again...

This isn't the mountains of afghanistan... there are significant airports and roads going just about anywhere of importance.

victor809 wrote:

Three things you left out Victor....(1) We the People have NO rules of engagement (half the reason we lose as many men / women as we do in our military).

TMCTLT wrote:

(2) Our military has been "Out of Country for so long, we know it better than they do....

(3) I think you SERIOUSLY underestimate the resolve of most Americans

Absolutely outstanding huh???

You really ARE ****ED UP!!!!.