"Guns cannot be used to defeat government", What about Afghanistan then?

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by kazenatsu, Sep 3, 2021.

  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In one of Biden's unbelievably rambling bumbling speeches he said:
    "If you think you need to have weapons to take on the government? You need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons."

    video from C-Span here: C-SPAN - President Biden on 2nd Amendment: "If you think... (facebook.com)

    Biden mocked gun-rights advocates who say they need assault weapons to fight the government: 'You need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons'
    - June 24, 2021

    Now, does anyone want to try to explain to us what just happened in Afghanistan?
    How a backwards people who were practically held in a state of near defeat for many years suddenly overwhelmed a combination of the Afghan central government and some US military forces that were still stationed there?
    Biden and the mainstream media is telling us now that this was "inevitable".

    Oh, the hypocrisy.
     
  2. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,023
    Likes Received:
    19,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Vietnam and the ME are examples of why a powerful military is no match for an enemy hiding among friendlies. F-15s and nukes are useless.

    BTW, Taliban took over an entire country without wearing masks!!!
     
    AARguy likes this.
  3. Capt Nice

    Capt Nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    9,998
    Likes Received:
    10,217
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Afghanistan was a mistake that took 20 years for us to get our head on straight. Try and get over it and get on with your life.
     
    MJ Davies likes this.
  4. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Taliban won because the US was on its way out and the Afghan military were unwilling to fight. That's not the case in the US. Our cops and military are willing to shoot. The folks Biden was talking to were from the US, where they would need military equipment.

    Those gun nuts who think they can overthrow our gov't using their personal weapons are doomed if they try. They begin with problems with logistics, organization and coordination. None of this was a problem for the Taliban, who had been organized for forty years. All they had to do was not lose. Eventually the US would go away. That wouldn't be the case here. the rebels would have to win. there is nowhere for the US military to go away to.
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2021
    Melb_muser, CenterField and Hey Now like this.
  5. Rucker61

    Rucker61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    9,774
    Likes Received:
    4,103
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They could go to the other side.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  6. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not really. There is a history of US soldiers attacking civilians. Look up Kent State.
     
  7. Rucker61

    Rucker61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    9,774
    Likes Received:
    4,103
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm talking about units of the active military changing sides.
     
  8. Turtledude

    Turtledude Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    30,274
    Likes Received:
    20,259
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That was national guard.
     
  9. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They remain US troops. Same training, same equipment.
     
  10. Rucker61

    Rucker61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    9,774
    Likes Received:
    4,103
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What if some supported the government, and others supported the opposition?
     
  11. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not gonna happen. That's where their money and benefits come from. Plus, if they do defect, they have the same logistical problems as the rest of the rebels.
     
  12. Rucker61

    Rucker61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    9,774
    Likes Received:
    4,103
    Trophy Points:
    113
    At the point if civil war, money and benefits are no longer an issue.

    A civil war in the US will not be a long affair.
     
  13. Turtledude

    Turtledude Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    30,274
    Likes Received:
    20,259
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    national guard, while under the direction of a state governor, can be used in civil unrest. The US Army or Marines etc cannot.
     
  14. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh wow! You've actually managed to post something that is not anti-vaxxer BS. Progress!!!
    ----
    Uh, what? There were 2,500 American troops there, no longer involved in combat. That's why backwards people took over, fighting off another set of backwards people who have no guts to engage in the fight. While we had 130,000 troops there, they were unable to take over.

    Obviously the Afghan central government didn't have F-15s and nuclear weapons. So Biden was talking about what would be necessary to take down the American government, not the Afghan government.

    I can't believe that you don't see the difference. What the... This counts as one of the most ridiculous OPs I've read here, and that's against some tough competition for the Raspberry Award.

    Yes, it is true that these American militias who think they would stand a chance against the American government are out of their minds...

    This said, I do support the 2nd amendment and I am a gun owner.
     
  15. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They did have some fighter planes.

    The Taliban have access to US military aircraft. Now what happens? (defensenews.com)

    Once the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan's airfield in Kandahar on Friday, it didn't take long for photos to appear on social media showing Taliban fighters posing with military helicopters such as U.S.-made Black Hawks and Soviet-made Mi-17s.
    After the group took over Mazar-i-Sharif airport this weekend, more photos followed, this time of Taliban members standing next to an A-29 attack plane and MD-530 utility helicopter.
    Thanks to Joe Biden the Taliban Now has Over 200 Military Aircraft - Ranks them as #26 in List of Nations in Combat Aircraft Strength
    More military aircraft than Spain.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2021
  16. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That was AFTER the comment you highlighted in your OP was made. When that comment was made (look at the time stamp on the right side of the page you linked to, it was from June 23rd), the Taliban did not have this significant arsenal (and yes, it was a mistake to leave it behind). The Taliban, even after that, still doesn't possess F15s and nuclear weapons.

    Sorry, your OP is utterly ridiculous. You transposed to Afghanistan a comment aimed at US militias, talking about the strength of the US military, domestically. Yes, Afghan militias are able to topple the Afghan government, duh, we just saw that. US militias however are NOT able to topple the US government, duh. If you don't see the difference, then I pity you. At least you get the Raspberry Award. Make good use of it.

    Methinks you should ask a moderator to delete this thread. It's a stain in your already pitiful posting history. It qualifies as one of the most ridiculous threads ever posted to PF, seriously.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2021
    Imnotreallyhere likes this.
  17. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's besides the point. The point was that the side the Taliban was fighting against had those.

    I think you're maybe getting a little confused now.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2021
  18. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just hypothetically, it might be possible in the distant future if the US was very weak, and those elements inside the country were receiving support from an outside military power.
    Combine it with defections of major military officers, and military commanders that don't feel very motivated to fight because of a specific cause or the situation, and it could be very possible.
    A country could be weakened by foreign war or having its finances in tatters.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2021
  19. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They had F15s and nuclear weapons? LOL.
    Again, look at the time stamp of your own link. June 23rd.
    Again, the comment was about what it would take to topple the AMERICAN government. Jesus!!!
    Question:
    What is easier in your opinion? A) To topple an unmotivated, poorly equipped, disorganized, corrupt military in a s...hole of a Third World country? or B) To topple the US government, which is in command of the best and most equipped military on Earth?

    What is it, big guy? A or B?

    Again, your OP is ridiculous. You're transposing to a different situation, a comment that was never intended to apply to that, and does NOT apply to that, very poor analogy. Unbelievable. Hey, go back to the anti-vaxxer BS you post. Even though it's crap, it's maybe a bit less crap than this OP of yours. A tiny bit.
     
    Imnotreallyhere likes this.
  20. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, sure. Sure, sure, man. Dream on. You're making a lot of sense (insert rolling eyes here)
     
    Imnotreallyhere likes this.
  21. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    @kazenatsu Good bye, I have no more time to waste with this nonsense. Have a nice afternoon.
     
  22. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem is, you want to pass laws based on current circumstances, and refuse to consider that circumstances in the future (or even distant future) could be any different.
    Laws are not so easy to change, so it's not just a simple matter of "We'll change the law then if we need to".

    It's a lot like preparing for an emergency or natural disaster. It's unlikely to happen any time soon in the near future but that does not mean preparations should not be made. (I guess it's no surprise most of those on the Progressive Left don't do that and think it's crazy, ridicule "preppers", probably same political mentality. Then when it happens they blame private businesses for price gouging, demand that the government should provide free home insurance for natural disasters, etc)

    There's a whole other deep discussion we could have on this, but I'll save it for another time.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2021
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,634
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, the US is more and more headed in a Third World direction, so there is that to consider.

    You just take things for granted and assume things will never change.
     
  24. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    First, the OP's idea was that privately owned weapons could overthrow the US gov't. In hypothesizing the US military rebelling as well, you are implicitly conceding the point.

    Second, why would you think pay and benefits wouldn't be an issue? Their families still have to be fed, clothed and housed.

    You still haven't addressed logistics or c3 problems. Where are the munitions, gas and food coming from? Who's in charge and where does his authority come from?

    If the US military needs to be involved, a civil war will indeed be long and bitter.
     
  25. Imnotreallyhere

    Imnotreallyhere Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,881
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    True. That's why the Guard was there rather than the Regulars. However, they are still trained and equipped the same as Regulars, with some riot control gear and training extra. There really isn't that much difference.
     

Share This Page