Being a little dsimissive there, sweetheart? A few? You mean about 60,000,000?
No, I've just thought through some scenarios. Granted, I'm not a professional; I'm just using public info and some common sense. Of course a small team, if they're good, can do a lot of damage.
It would be a war of attrition. The government forces would have control of virtually all food and supplies, everything from gasoline to toilet paper to medical supplies, the entire supply chain, transportation, the Air Force, most of the larger cities and their police forces and State National Guards, drones, every airport, etc. The government could work on the rebels access to vehicle repair parts, motor oil, gasoline. The government would control gun manufacturing, replacement parts and ammunition factories. Food production is critical and the government forces would work with companies like the globalist bankster-controlled Archer Daniels Midland to ensure that civilians had food and rebels were foraging for themselves.
The government forces would be facing off against many small groups that were lightly armed (no tanks, artillery, planes). This rebel force would need to keep on the good side of citizens who sat it out in their homes (if they attacked the citizenry they'd be viewed simply as terrorists and bandits). The rebels would be hard pressed to have any communication that the government could not shut off or worse monitor. They would have a very difficult time having cell phones, ipods or internet as they could not legitimately pay monthly bills to service providers. They would have to hook up with underground civilian networks of people (necessitating funding) who would procure illegitimate communications technology on the black market. The rebels would not be able to walk into a doctor or hospital for medical care; that would have to come from the black market; it would be prone to detection and would rely on either funding or people who would take the risky work for free to support the cause. Medical supplies and equipment would have to be brought to hidden medical facilities. Rebels could not use credit or debit cards or have bank accounts; they'd be all cash but would have no earning capability. Sympathetic civilians would have to fund them with cash. Every movement of the rebels exposes them to getting caught.
Once a treaty is signed in DC to join up with an international government (chances are when this happens there will not be a civil war over it, a la the European Union), the rebels would have to somehow defeat the entire U.S. military and then convince the American people to convince Congress to renege on the ratified treaty. We're already in NATO. This change will happen slowly, step by step. People may not even realize when the crucial step is taken.
Rebels would have to abandon their jobs, businesses and homes. Future prospects of them getting hired if they lost would be dim. The largest and most effective forces that were causing the most damage would slowly and methodically be hunted by elite U.S. government forces. If they ran into unpopulated areas, the full fury of attack helicopters, tanks, drones, etc., could be used to mercilessly eradicate them, not to mention that if they're in unpopulated areas they can't win the war, they're just hiding and isolated from society. They'd stand a much better chance of survival by hiding in suburbs or cities operating as "resistance" forces. But every time they did an operation that caused significant damage, the full force of local, State and Federal law enforcement and probably the military would be used to track them by interrogating their friends, neighbors and coworkers. The resistance would need funding, which would be tracked, and would need supply and support, which would expose the resistance to getting caught.
It don't look good, IMHO. I'm just looking at the history of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century. It is extremely difficult and dangerous to bring them down from within.
If the military has significantly divided loyalties, that could wind up in a Civil War (which the banksters would welcome as they would finance both sides). That would be essentially the military dividing into two and fighting itself, with the rebel civilians joining up with the rebel military.
Of course, if treaties are signed, one by one, and everybody stays on the couch, we simply drift towards becoming a unit of the United Nations. IMHO, we'll see NAFTA and other American union agreements gradually solidify the Americas into a one body, like the European Union. Then the bankster's men that run the "unions" can merge the unions into the one world government; they won't have to merge the separate nations directly. Within 20 years, IMHO, if things keep going as they are, there won't be enough resistance amongst Americans to stop it just due to the "hotheaded" people like FReepers getting older (make sure you get the next generation to join FR, get them to read some real history and put the toys down !).
Wacky stuff, IMHO. But the banksters seem to have minds that are simply "wacked".
posted on 01/21/2013 9:14:15 AM PST
(We have to fix things ourselves)
“The government forces would have control of “
That’s your first bad assumption that leads to the rest of an illogical conclusion. At most there might be 4 million federal troops, at most. Hell, there are only about 150,000 troops under arms in the first place. You really think 50,000,000+ million Americans will let them have control of anything?? Those F-16’s, M-1 tanks, Bradley vehicles, and the like need massive maintenance, fuel, part, supplies, and just whose families do you think will have their asses swinging in the wind while their service members do the bad deeds? You think they’ll be safe? Do you really think 100% of the military would even go along with such orders as to attack us?
We built those systems, the tanks, the airplanes, the satellites, the communications systems, and the weapon systems. We run them, design them, operate and maintain them. Without all that the fed is deaf, dumb, and blind. The military isnt run by the military. It is run by the civilians that create and maintain it. An F-16 can fly about twice before it needs more maintenance. An M-1 tank goes but a few miles before it needs fuel. Soldiers cannot live past a week without food.
Sorry, but you give credit to the military as though it is some kind of beast with magical powers never needing food, water, or parts and is some kind of monster none of us know anything about. The military system is extremely fragile in that is needs constant care and feeding.
posted on 01/21/2013 9:36:34 AM PST
(Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
To: PieterCasparzen; CodeToad; humblegunner
“If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace.
We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
- Samuel Adams
posted on 01/21/2013 5:04:45 PM PST
(Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. Robert A. Heinlein.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson