The Right of Revolution

[The Grand Nudger]

We had absolute control over the skies, technology wasn't the issue. What exactly are you saying here? That rebelling against tyranny without tanks and aircraft would be too difficult, so we should just lay down if it ever occurs? I trained soldiers heading into our current clusterfucks in MOUT, trust me, you don't want to be the soldier trying to dislodge people from their homes, or dragging your ass through the swamps of S FL with good ole boys picking at you from all sides and then fading back into the cypress. Sure our technology is powerful, but there is a little bit of propaganda at work as to how effective it is.

Sae, as for the perpetual standoff. If theres ever a standoff between our government and people, it's the government that has to give. It's absurd to suggest otherwise. Where would they draw their authority from if they stood opposed to the will of the people? We let go of the divine right of rule (at least in theory) a couple centuries back.

---

I'm not arguing here that kids should be walking down the streets with glocks in their waistbands. I'd even tell Summer there to buy a baseball bat for security instead of a 9. What I'm arguing against is providing government with the means to impose tyranny upon us in the name of our collective safety.

[Violet]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh Sae. We need to take you around the rest of America.

---

Believe me - plenty of options for guerrilla warfare here.

I live in a forrest. A somewhat dense one, if you please. Almost completely undeveloped, though there is a road somewhere a few miles from here.

You can hunt in this forrest and have a good time, since it's thick and large and the animals blend in.

In a jungle though... you have the undergrowth. There isn't a lot for space to move in them... while we have grass here: a jungle looks like this:



Hint: it's harder to get around in a jungle.

[Minimalist]

Why would the military bother to throw a coup when it can essentially rule without toppling the government?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/17...29046.html

WASHINGTON -- Large new cuts in defense spending would "terribly weaken" U.S. national security, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Tuesday as he and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton used a rare joint interview to argue that the nation cannot afford to keep playing partisan chicken with its finances.

"These lily-livered politicians want to destroy our ability to protect this nation. WE have to save our country from all enemies. Let's get 'em, boys!!!!"


(And please don't tell me it couldn't happen here. If history has taught us anything it is that it can happen anywhere.)

[thesummerqueen]

Sae, not all of America is flat land - though a good portion is, like you mentioned.

All people need to do is retreat to mountains. Or swamps. Or thickly forested areas that they know well. Just because it's not the Amazon or a southeast Asian jungle doesn't mean they can't make it hard for an advancing enemy to get anywhere.

Not only that, but it doesn't matter what our technology is - try climate. Imagine some Texan boys being forced to fight in a Michigan winter, or vice versa.

---

Btw, I was born in Panama. My dad is a former Army ranger. I'm aware of the differences - he still has the machetes.

[Faith No More]

No, I'm not saying that we should just bow down to the government because they have superior technology. I'm just pointing out that guns are not the great equalizer they appear to be when trying to topple such a well funded military.

[The Grand Nudger]

They're something. Without them we'd be throwing rocks.

[Violet]

We had absolute control over the skies, technology wasn't the issue. What exactly are you saying here? That rebelling against tyranny without tanks and aircraft would be too difficult, so we should just lay down if it ever occurs? I trained soldiers heading into our current clusterfucks in MOUT, trust me, you don't want to be the soldier trying to dislodge people from their homes, or dragging your ass through the swamps of S FL with good ole boys picking at you from all sides and then fading back into the cypress. Sure our technology is powerful, but there is a little bit of propaganda at work as to how effective it is.

I told you already: the jungle was the issue. It's just great to have tanks, you know. Wonderful, really. It's even better when those tanks can't shoot at anything because of all the trees.

You'll notice the situation is quite different in an urban setting with nice little roads and ordered buildings. Sure, urban warfare has it's own difficulties... but being unable to see your enemy is not one of them.

It's pointless to consolidate florida without an unreasonable amount of force. It's a fucking swamp. Reason the US bought florida from the spanish: I'm still working on that. I really and truly don't see anything worthwhile in that swamp

Also, the way I conduct wars is quite different from 'dislodging people from their homes'. I'm a butcher when in charge of a military and someone dares to war with me. I've razed down entire quadrants of the galaxy without annexing them, committing three genocides in the process. I truly am unconcerned with the wellbeing of my enemies.

Sae, as for the perpetual standoff. If theres ever a standoff between our government and people, it's the government that has to give. It's absurd to suggest otherwise. Where would they draw their authority from if they stood opposed to the will of the people? We let go of the divine right of rule (at least in theory) a couple centuries back.

Why would the government give? It has all of the power and the people have none of it. If the people refuse to work: whip them. If they remain standing firm: slay them. Slavery is a necessary part of such a government.

They draw their authority from being able to slaughter the people. What else does a slave-driver need?

I'm not arguing here that kids should be walking down the streets with glocks in their waistbands. I'd even tell Summer there to buy a baseball bat for security instead of a 9. What I'm arguing against is providing government with the means to impose tyranny upon us in the name of our collective safety.

Impossible if you want a government with control. I prefer anarchy: more honest in its intentions all around.

[Jaysyn]

With all of the killer military hardware our government has at its disposal, is holding onto what amounts to pea-shooters in comparison going to make a difference if it comes to armed conflict?

So they are going to use that "killer military hardware" to take out their own infrastructure?

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh Sae. We need to take you around the rest of America.

---

Believe me - plenty of options for guerrilla warfare here.

Yeah, she talks a big talk, but as she does it you realize that she hasn't been around very much.

[Violet]

Sae, not all of America is flat land - though a good portion is, like you mentioned.

All one needs is a good portion of a place with a few resource provinces here and there, to have a powerful government.

All people need to do is retreat to mountains. Or swamps. Or thickly forested areas that they know well. Just because it's not the Amazon or a southeast Asian jungle doesn't mean they can't make it hard for an advancing enemy to get anywhere.

Correct. It's specifically the plains (and being massed in cities) that I consider untenable for defense come a civil war.

Not only that, but it doesn't matter what our technology is - try climate. Imagine some Texan boys being forced to fight in a Michigan winter, or vice versa.

This is true. Alaska is large enough to be its own country, by all means. And it's going to be a lot of 'fun' trying to invade it. More fun if you aren't used to being cold. The natives could well enough show you how to survive in alaska without a whole lot for shelter Unlike many states: we still have all of our natives.

Btw, I was born in Panama. My dad is a former Army ranger. I'm aware of the differences - he still has the machetes.

Good. Jungle would still be the safest option for defending from an invasion, of course Second best bet: mountain caves. Where you know the terrain... and they do not.

---

So they are going to use that "killer military hardware" to take out their own infrastructure?

Absolutely. It will come at a cost, of course... but gaining full control could be well worth the while. Then it's on to annex canada and mexico

Yeah, she talks a big talk, but as she does it you realize that she hasn't been around very much.

And as you say things like this, it becomes plainly apparent you have never experienced an intragalactic scale war Or witnessed trillions of citizens die of death spores and bombs and mauler device and being invaded by a single bulrathi unit and losing an entire planet full of defenders to it.

[Minimalist]

They're something. Without them we'd be throwing rocks.

That's all the Egyptian crowds had.

Of course, what was the result? The Army is in charge.


Frying pan to the fire.