Posted on 07/10/2009 9:32:03 AM PDT by AJKauf
Armed revolution isn’t obsolete, even in an era when the weapons systems available to the government are overwhelmingly destructive.
Highly destructive weapons systems, if used in cities, kill so many innocents that such actions turn people against the government. Think about what happened at Waco in 1993 and the part it played in the Democratic loss of Congress (and, unfortunately, in provoking Timothy McVeigh). There’s a limit to how much firepower you can unleash without destroying your government’s own base of support.
There’s another reason that armed revolution is still not only feasible, but sometimes actually necessary to overthrow a tyrannical government. ..
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Theres not a damn thing funny about it, but is apparently becoming necessary.
Government military power usually outweighs all its competitors. But they usually can’t use it all at once, since they’re almost always using it for something else. Plus, revolutionaries are usually willing to do things the powers that be aren’t. Oh, and it’s always useful to turn parts of the ruling class against itself.
The American People are just too damn lazy to revolt, I’m sorry but I have lost all faith in my fellow rock dwellers to take charge in time crisis. Hell they are usually why we are in this mess in the first place, they elected these Fascists in the first place, despite all of us hollering at the tops of our lungs for them not to.
There is NOTHING at all funny about it. I cannot think of one thing funny about it. It may or may not be a necessary thing somewhere off in the future, but it certainly will NOT EVER be a funny thing. It will not be funny to go through, it will not be funny to be involved in, it will not be funny on any level.
If something like this happens, you cannot imagine the destruction and damage to people and property. Many people you know will die or be injured. Acquaintences, friends, family, business people, people at church. Nothing funny at all about this subject.
Good read, thank you for the post.
I have to agree that there are times for violence and hate; after-all it’s a rather pathetic man who doesn’t hate corruption/evil and/or refuses to stand-up/fight for anything.
Concerning "Rock Dwellers" you may be right, but concerning "Rednecks" it is a little different.
Nobody has to go up against the authorities. Just their supporters, then it becomes the authorities job to protect their base. Puts them on defence from the get.
See Somalia 1993 for the impact or an armed populace.
It would take the concerted coordinated effort of the military and police (sheriff, marshall) to plan a coup that includes all three branches of our Federal Government. At the least the Executive and the Congress will need to be ‘controlled’ by people bearing armaments.
That isn't an armed revolution scenario, at least not as it's likely to go down in the United States. "What chance do you and your shotgun have against the entire U.S. Army?" is a false premise. "What chance do 90 million armed citizens have against 1.8 million military and police combined?" is a lot closer assessment to the reality on the ground. If it gets to that point the country will be ungovernable.
I’m with you Jack. I don’t think secession will ever take hold.
I've often wondered about our militarys' action in the event of an armed revolt. The usual spin is that the Armed Forces would support the government. I'm not completely convinced of this. Seems to me that the military is really the only organ of our government that takes it's oath seriously, and it might take some convincing for them to accept that the way our constitution is being trampled by our elected official is in line with the traditional concept of preserving, protecting and defending that document t. For sure there would be elements of the A.F. that would support the government, but I'd bet that there would be those who would refuse to attack the citizenry.
Hm... so you’re suggesting what, exactaly?
To Lazy,,,Exactly Right.
as the Romans,,,Keep the Circus and the Bread Coming and all is Well.
The article Brought out interesting Ideas,,,
There’s another reason that armed revolution is still not only feasible, but sometimes actually necessary to overthrow a tyrannical government. Consider what happens when Mullah X tells General Y to have his troops mow down the protesters. General Y might not have a problem with this, but some of his soldiers will. Private A might sympathize with the protesters or have some moral problems with killing unarmed civilians. But what is he going to do? If he protests, or refuses orders, he will at least be court-martialed — and maybe his commander shoots him on the spot, as an example to other soldiers. It will take a pretty courageous (or foolish) private to take a chance like this. The worst that happens if Private A follows orders is that he has some sleepless nights about what he has done.
Now, what happens if the protesters are in a position to fight back? I won’t claim that the average collection of armed civilians is going to successfully defeat a military unit of comparable size. The soldiers are trained and disciplined, and they generally have better weapons than the civilians.
Still, what happens when Private A (and more than a few of his fellow soldiers) now receives orders to open fire? If he follows the repugnant orders, there is now a real risk of getting killed by an enraged civilian shooting back. If Private A perceives that the risk from the civilians is roughly comparable to the risk from the government, he is now free to change sides — and that is what has happened in a number of successful revolutions in the last few decades. Once the civilians become dangerous, individual soldiers and entire military organizations change sides. (As eventually happened in Romania.)
This is the reason that, throughout recent history, governments scared of armed revolution take steps to disarm the civilian population. Britain passed the Firearms Act in 1920 (licensing rifles and handguns) because the cabinet was convinced that Britain was on the edge of a Bolshevik revolution. While statements made in Parliament when the bill was introduced claimed that the goal was crime control, cabinet papers declassified in 1969-70 demonstrate that the primary fear was armed revolution — and the disarming of civilians was driven by that fear.
Armed revolution remains a viable response to tyranny — at least if you live in the universe where armed revolution at least occasionally has succeeded in overthrowing it. (In Mr. Kraushaar’s universe, maybe not!)
Military coup....
Really? Are YOU NUTS????!
Like any military that WILL exert force to overthrow its governmental body would actually return the power to the people. Sorry, but your idea is the epitome of “out of the frying pan and into the fire.”
Have you heard about Honduras?
|
FTFY The government has always born the greater sword against it's competitors otherwise the competitor becomes the new government.
The disparity between power of governments and the power of individuals may never have been greater than it is today. It depends on how you look at things. What is an AR-15 against sarin, small pox, state-run media, APC's with flamethrowers or the hydrogen bomb? On the other hand, individuals have cars and highways, aircraft, cell-phones with video cameras, gps, computers, internet and more anonymity, wealth and time than ever before. Whenever a government decides that it's people are insects that must be eradicated, those people that are targeted won't have much chance.
not a dang thing is funny about it, so one prays daily that it will not be necessary
Small elements. The vast majority would simply follow orders. There would be some complaints, and possibly some refusal at first to do so, but they would quickly make an example of the first ones to stand out and quickly convince the rest to toe the line. It has happened literally thousands of times before in history.
Yep. But I don’t know all the details there yet, it hasn’t been deeply covered so I don’t trust that it is what it seems. I really doubt that it is as you think it is.
...I doubt we’ll see armed revolution....what we will see IMHO is the United States break up along racial lines...wars of secession and partition are a global reality...in time they will come here too...if I were betting on it, the Southwest will go first led by the Reconquistas....see Thomas Chittum’s “Civil War Two: The Coming Breakup of the United States”
http://www.timebomb2000.com/misc/CWII.pdf
P.S. pass it on!
Just an observation from the Iraqi theatre. Our forces were far superior to the enemy, direct military confrontation was suicide.
The dirty buggers turned their guns on the populace that they suspected of supporting the new Iraqi state. This was much more difficult for the more powerful military force to control. It did serious damage to the legitimacy of the new government also. Had it not been for our tenacity it may have worked.
Shrewd, yes. Down right evil in the given example, yes. Effective.....you betcha.
I know many military men over my service and beyond. I can guarantee that the military will turn on this Government that fires upon their mothers, fathers, and children. King Obama better fear the military because they will not turn on their own for a rotten sick Government. RATS be careful or does not this wake you up.
Agreed! The damage the Marxist Obama has done/will do cannot be undone, barring a Civil War, IMO.
Are there enough Patriots left to do this? I don’t think so. Look around, more people know who has won every American Idol then who the last two Vice Presidents are.
I’d bet that there would be those who would refuse to attack the citizenry.
“Small elements. The vast majority would simply follow orders. There would be some complaints, and possibly some refusal at first to do so, but they would quickly make an example of the first ones to stand out and quickly convince the rest to toe the line. It has happened literally thousands of times before in history.”
I guess that’s it then!! Might as well go back and sit in my easy chair, drink beer while I can afford it, turn on the TV and forget about it!!
...and BTW we’ve already had three wars of secession and partition in this country: 1776, 1835, 1861.....we’re about due for another.
Somehow the military didn't help the Honduran president all that much.
They almost got it right, too. It would have been better to disrupt the flow of necessary goods into the towns than it was to go in and rule through sheer terror. The town could then be convinced that the disruptions would only end when the occupiers were removed.
>Hold new elections in 2010 and we have our country back.<
.
That is, if there is not another Obama waiting in the wings. The country is filled with people crazy enough to put that guy in the WH and those who voted for him will not disappear — they’ll vote for another Obama.
We are no longer united as a country — the desire for diversity and multiculturalism has made this nation a collection of sub-cultures, each with its own axe to grind. (Minorities swing the biggest axe.)
The US wanted to become a country with a population represented by every nation in the world and has succeeded to do so. In the history of humanity there has never been a period of complete peace. As such, don’t ever expect peace within our borders.
Yes
“Oath Keepers” and many other rogues.
Never want to go there, but if “the Kenyan” thinks he can destroy us without a reaction, he is BADLY mistaken.
Does the name George Washington ring a bell?
Or Rwanda for how fast one large social class can turn on another.
...which is exactly what I expect will happen in CA once this IOU debacle shatters the economic floor there.
They were willing to take on a Superior fighting force, and suffer great losses to win. It certainly can be done, but I don't think the average American would EVER be willing to do that. We are unwilling to accept civilian casualties on our enemies side! I don't believe America will stand up as a nation, even when they are ordered to pray to Allah 5 times a day.
Honduras is a completely different situation: all other branches of government agreed the Executive needed removal from power (per checks-and-balances). The military simply did what it was told to do (grab one man and put him on an airplane); it did NOT sieze power.
When the people’s complaints are ignored, when the voting system is ripe with corruption, and when letters to our representatives are ignored what do you do?
You revolt. If it’s by the barrel of a gun so be it. It’s costly in life and money. But so is tyranny.
What has me concerned, is Obama’s call for a civilian national security force, equal in power to the US military. Why would he need this? Is he worried about the “Military Oath of Induction” to uphold the constitution from both foreign and domestic tyranny?
I can see it now, ACORN and SEIU with AK47’s facing off against our brothers in arms...
past time
“Like any military that WILL exert force to overthrow its governmental body would actually return the power to the people. Sorry, but your idea is the epitome of ‘out of the frying pan and into the fire.’”
Thank you for speaking out. I was about to say that also.
Panama was under a military dictatorship from 1969 until 1989 (20 years, 2 months, 8 days). Panama would still have a military dictatorship had the U.S. not come in and thrown out the last military dictator, Noriega.
Few know the following:
Richard Nixon in 1969 backed the military coup in Panama. Many think he actually encouraged it because he didn’t like the new president (who admittedly was crazy). Thank you Nixon. I hope you are burning in hell. A lot of people were murdered during that time.
An overthrow of a government by its military is indeed very dangerous. They suddenly become drunk with power.
P.S.
Again, thank you for speaking out.
I lived through a military dictatorship and know of what you speak.
I'd rather live in Somalia than in Cuba
You must be careful in a situation like this because the results could be much worse than what you’ve got now. Anarchy, and all the associated evils that go along with it, would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to recover from.
And don’t forget that politicians are only part of the problem. The various beauracracies are plenty dangerous all by themselves. Not to mention expensive, closed minded, and dim dues paying union members.
I always thought that the easiest way to go about this would be to use primative economics. If you look at voting patterns, you will see that urban areas typically vote liberal, while suburban and rural areas vote much more conservatively. OK, where is food grown and raised? Just refuse to sell foodstuffs to any urban area and you will get their attention pretty damn quick.
When my govt forces me to pay for the abortion of others and even takes my my to pay for abortions worldwide it is a tyrannical government.
When my govt is run by a bunch of socialist puke democrats it is a tyrannical government
Time for an overthrow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.