Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
1) I honestly doubt it because American citizens are generally big pussies and as time goes on they will probably get a lot worse. That said, if they do, who wins or loses is irrelevant. If they feel they have the right to try to defend themselves or do whatever it is they are trying to do, they should have that right. Look at what is happening in Syria right now. If the rebels were not armed it would have ended on day 2 and they are fighting the Syrian military and gaining ground.
|
I honestly doubt American citizens would ever have the need to rise up against it's government. Two hundred years later we are spoiled little bitches and have no idea how good we've got it.
What's happening in Syria is most interesting. The "rebels" have been very slowly gaining ground, but it's costing a lot - with the Syrian military, the rebel's losses, and the civilian population - and I'm wondering if they can pull it off. However, it's not fair to compare Syria to what could happen in the US. The US military is vastly different from Syria's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
2) You are assuming the US military would actually fire on US citizens. Maybe the baby killers would, but most of them would not. Using the middle east as another example, many soldiers changed sides and fought with the rebels, and they did this in every country involved in the "Arab Spring." Should that day ever come, and I doubt it will, I can't imagine too many of them following orders.
|
Dunno.
But when US citizens are armed and firing on the military, I am guessing the military would fire back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
3) The "most powerful military in the world" can't beat the Taliban, can't get Iraq in order, and couldn't beat the rice farming, poorly trained Viet Cong. While they may be technically superior in every way, that does not mean automatic victory.
|
Vietnam was a very different time and is most interesting to study from a historic point of view. I have a book called "The Thin Grey Line" which details the journey of a small group of people through West Point and then Vietnam - and the aftermath. The government failed to support the military, the public was against both the military and the government, and the military itself was at it's low point with lots of drug use and violence.
As for the Taliban and Iraq, well, seems to me both the Taliban and Saddam were both QUICKLY removed from power. Saddam promised us the "mother of all battles" and what a let down that was. What's happening now in both Afghanistan and Iraq is failed country building, not a failure on the part of the US military.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
4) Those "little assault rifles" kill just the same as any other firearm, but we both know a lot of people have a lot more firepower than that.
|
This seems to be part of the problem in Syria. The "rebels" are poorly armed and are fighting a military of tanks and jets. Originally the rebels didn't have anything other than small arms - assault rifles. Slowly they started getting anti aircraft weapons, and god only knows what else.