I made a point you refuse to acknowledge re: the Watertown incident.
In the NAME of safety and security - as we saw in Watertown - people will be WILLING to be run from their homes at gunpoint and offer them up to searches while the military sweeps the town for whatever they are looking for. Anyone pops up in a window that some armored cop from an APC finds threatening - BAM! One shot, one kill.
Too bad if it turns out to be a kid with a squirt gun. Right? Do we really want to accept that this is the kind of country we have to live in now? As long as we are WILLING to let the military police do as they please, we should be willing to do so to keep us safe?
Do you really trust the government and it’s alphabets to keep you safe?? Do you believe that is their job? Do you believe they think that is their job?
If so, you are far more trusting of government than I will ever be.
We are being conditioned to accept living in a police state. To believe whatever the government or the cops claim. So - if and when the government asserts some church is a bunch of child molesting domestic terrorists -a majority of folks like you who think Watertown was a good thing, will end up applauding a military shake down of a neighborhood or town again, all in the name of supposed safety and security.
So how can you say that the American people are not going to tolerate military subjugation when you just admitted that not only WILL YOU tolerate it if it’s for supposed safety and security reasons.... as long as the people are willing to cooperate with such subjugation, it’s not really subjugation?
Your own commentary here makes my point that the government does not have to send in troops for a stated purpose of conquering and subduing a people - but merely has to convince them that it is for their safety and security that they relent to whatever is demanded of them - and the people toss their rights out the window.
That was my entire point in posting the pics from Watertown in reply to your assertion that the American people would resist any military ‘occupation’. I say NO, they won’t. Because if they are led to believe it’s for their safety and security - people will WILLINGLY welcome it.
Which gets to the question of trust.
Do you trust this regime and it’s agents to be honest about whatever it is they need us to surrender our homes, our rights and our liberties for??
They could move entire populations if that is the case, under the auspices of a loose bomb or unspecified ‘imminent terror threat’ and the people will willingly hop on cattle cars, trains or buses for wherever they are told to go.
It’s like the closing of our embassies in the Mid-East this week. The government can make claims that they have unspecified but secretly specific threats that force actions to “keep us safe”. But none of us will ever really know if this was just a ploy to keep the scandals out of the news, or if Obama wanted the world to recognize his birthday - or if Al Qaeda really planned to hit our embassies.
I personally think it’s safer and more prudent to assume the worst of this government and it’s intentions, than to trust any claims it makes about our security when Obama has demonstrated to me that he and the entire cabal in Washington cannot be trusted with a damn thing. Not a DAMN thing.
I mean - what is to stop the regime from making a claim of imminent danger and force people from their homes at gunpoint like in Watertown and then make up any story or excuse they like about where they are being ‘relocated’??
I mean, a “video” caused the Benghazi uprising and massacre of our ambassador and 3 other Americans, right?? You really going to put that trust in Obama and the government after Benghazi and what we learned they are doing with the IRS, NSA PRISM, and every other scandal we do not yet know about??
Your point is that you believe the American people will resist with force any tyranny visited upon them.
My point is that the American people have already demonstrated that they will willingly comply with tyranny, especially if it is under the auspices of safety and security.
Or free health care.
Then when misery and want begin, they will do so for a mere promise of provision. Again, human nature and history speaking.
Why do you assume we are somehow exempt from that?
Those in power understand that fact of human nature and history - and they will exploit it to their advantage. In fact, they already are.
There you go again. You made a mistake by conflating the Watertown incident with a hypothetical imposition of martial law, and now you're forced to construct a passably logical explanation for doing so.
It still doesn't hold water because your entire argument rests upon the assumption that the government would attempt to pacify the people by telling them that those jack booted thugs outside their doors, are only there for their protection and safety. Meanwhile, they're watching their neighbors being hauled into the street and beaten down to the ground before being hauled off to never never land.
You can post thousands of words to me if you like, but you can't knock me off topic, and I'm not going to let you off the hook for the presumptions of cowardice you've leveled at my countrymen.
For the third (or is it fourth) time now, a declaration of martial law by any wanna-be dictator in the Oval Office is going to result in:
A. An immediate and horrific breakdown in cohesion among the several branches of the U.S. military, as the troops' loyalties to their countrymen and the Constitution vs the mad dictator, break across ideological lines. Instant internal warfare would be the likely result, with a very real possibility that a significant contingent would seek to arrest and imprison the CIC for treason.
B. The immediate assumption of a war posture by the armed citizenry in this country, who number 100,000,000 strong. Even if only one in ten were to adopt that posture, you're still talking about a domestic insurgency of 10,000,000 armed and very dangerous individuals who cannot be talked down, and who will not disarm or back off until the threat to their life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, is removed.
Our entire military couldn't handle an estimated fifteen thousand Islamic insurgents in Iraq. Even with a 'no-holds-barred' ROE, what makes you think they can handle TEN MILLION armed citizens who will fight to the death to protect their families, homes, and country from a government gone mad?
As I stated before, the hard left is playing with fire here, and is bucking for the complete demise of their political power, all influence, and very possibly the continued existence of their political philosophy in this country. If they decide to go forward with the ultimate test of the people's resolve, it will end badly for them.