If the entire might of the US miltary turned against the population....

If a civilian just wanted to stay neutral, stay out of it and stay alive, that's a big problem. Because all systems as we know them will be soon broken down in such a war as previously described.

You have to keep out of the way of the military and the militias.
You have to keep out of the way of roving gangs who will kill you and take all your food, water, and useful goods.
You have to keep out of the way of marauders who will take all your food, water, and useful goods, but let you live with nothing left to live on.
As it continues you may have to keep out of the way of cannibals who will kill you, eat you, take all your useful goods, and move on to their next feast.

 

Orders are orders, and few if any laws apply in such a situation.

 

It would never happen. They will first reduce the loyal population. Next, increase the numbers of those against the current government. Once that's done, they will simply change the laws that allow them to be elected by those who are not supposed to vote, but are loyal to them. After, they will have the nation and will never have to worry about losing power, since they have already changed the laws to allow only them to be in charge. There will need to be someone in charge at the top, once the government has complete control, since there would be too much in-fighting and nothing would get done while the population starved. A police state across the nation would solve the problem of the hungry bringing out there guns. They would be shot on sight by 'loyalists' of the new government who have enough to eat.

Some would be in large prisons and used as slaves to work, since working would only get them barely enough to eat and nothing but life of toil. The dictator, or whatever you want to call him/her will have to use government police to get all the fed under control and work toward their goals. I do not believe they are stupid enough to have folks killing each other, if they can help it, since all will be needed to work or the nation's economy will collapse and social justice will not be achieved. It isn't justice. It's robbery and subjugation.

The dream cannot work. It can only make life worse for the poor.

 

2/3 of the military are untrained idiots who have never picked up a gun.

 

We'd also have to have a complete breakdown of the Constitution and the government, since the military is sworn to uphold the Constitution and Posse Commitatus forbids such an act.

 

Yea I thought that was implied in the scenario

 

Awe shucks, you're not really advocating a tax funded single payer system,.....
My bad

 

I think the scenario would degenerate, in that situation, to a ridiculous number of people leaving their posts.

Those who would remain would have their hands busy protecting whatever base they're at and maintaining supply lines.

No food, no fuel.....military isn't going to be able to do much except hold their own area.

 

Correct, I have never advocated for single payer system.

 

Yup exactly. The might of numbers is overwhelming

 

There are 30,000 towns and cities in the USA. Even if the soldiers could overcome some they would be spread so thin by the time they tried to overcome that last that they would probably lose control of all of them.

 

Might of numbers means nothing when the vast majority of those numbers are untrained civilians who will throw down their weapons and surrender, or totally rout, when the first artillery barrage or cluster bomb strike comes in.

 

I see you understand why Democrats work against the Constitution.

 

No, the military won't support your buddy, the Orange Oaf, if he tries to turn them on the people after he's voted out of office in 2020.

 

Ok let's say hundreds of civilians ram a base with plows (or whatever vehicle) and 10s of thousands storm the gates armed with guns, or whatever they found along the way.

What if a whole town or city charged their local base?

Even if you mowed down shots and used riot tactics...it's too many people.

 

How many untrained civilians will keep charging ahead when the people in front of them are being mowed down by .50cal or 25mm Bushmaster fire? How many will keep driving plows at the base when every vehicle that gets within 500 meters is getting schwacked with a Javelin or TOW?

 

I think its funny that the same people who are saying in this thread that untrained civilians would charge trained soldiers regardless of casualties and overwhelm them with sheer numbers are the same people who in Benghazi threads insisted that trained, hardened insurgents/terrorists would have broken and ran if a fighter jet just flew over head at low level.

 

.50 cals need to reload. All it takes is one lucky hit from a glass bottle to knock him off it. If you have 10s of THOUSANDS charging, many will slip around bullets and riot control. It's too many people.

The base would get over-run. There's no debating it. No one has to be trained to storm a base. Just need to knock a few walls down and run. Once they get close, it's game over. Anyone who has to reload while defending that many people might as well be considered dead.

Too many people for a "cover me while I move!".

 

People do need to be trained to keep charging a defensive position that is mowing down people by the hundreds/thousands. Untrained civilians aren't going to keep moving forward against incoming fire like that unless there are Soviet style commissars at their backs who will murder them if they retreat.

 

Exactly. Most Americans are soft...mentally and/or physically. Why people think most Americans will suddenly become fierce fighting warriors is beyond me.

 

No base is prepared for those numbers.

Also, I was under the assumption that in this scenario, no one from either side would retreat or surrender. OP correct me if I'm wrong.

 

It has nothing to do with "most Americans". I don't care where their from, untrained civilians aren't going to keep charging forward against incoming fire that is absolutely murdering them unless there are people behind them who will kill them if they retreat.

 

If we are assuming that US military is going to suddenly turn against the population, we can safely assume that military would have mobilized in preparation.

Nothing in the OP about assuming no surrender or retreat. It does specifically mention "subdue" though, which would definitely mean surrender and retreat are on the table.

 

Military bases are located in pockets. Some of them in very remote areas which would benefit them for defense. Some are right by MASSIVE cities that house MILLIONS of people.

If even a porttion of those cities with millions of people charge, that's a numbers game. Not a mobilization or defense game. It's too many people.

I wouldn't want to be the one responsible for writing that risk assessment, that's for sure.

 

You aren't going to get untrained civilians to charge defensive positions. Most military bases in cities are command or training facilities. The bases that actually house combat troops would very quickly suppress the untrained civilians in their immediate area, establish cantonments, and begin going after targets that would quickly break resistance in the cities. Bombing power plants and water treatment plants would a big first step.