This is how the US military would put down an armed rebellion

The 2nd Amendment was established in the Bill of Rights after the Articles of Confederation failed as a constitution for the country. Its purpose was to be a check and balance against the government, to prevent tyranny. Now that article is mostly true... Nobody would last long against tanks and helicopters. But that's not the point. The 2nd amendment also allows us to defend the homeland in case of invasion (very unlikely), and to defend ourselves against violent criminals. And if you want to get into the intent of the amendment to prevent tyranny, you could argue that we as citizens ought to have the right to own tanks, jets, and helicopters. Gun violence is a very localized issue. Where I live (a population dense yet casual gun-law area), guns are less of a problem than they are in California, where guns are all but prohibited. In south side Chicago, guns are actually a legitimate concern. Federal legislation against gun rights is ridiculous. But everytime a mass killing occurs, the media always points the finger of blame at a demonized piece of metal and polymer and says we need change. And people buy into it because it evokes their emotions. If people want to be activists and save lives, they're better off 1) pushing for stricter driving laws and 2) concealed carrying a handgun everywhere, everyday.

 

Again, don't project your paranoia and mental illness on Americans. The military would follow orders and easily handle a couple of rednecks.

 

You don't know anyone in the military do you?

 

Sure, I was in the Army for 8 years but don't know anyone.

I know that the entire chain of command and disciplinary structure won't break down because of a few inbred rednecks mad the trump didn't get elected. Again, I'd love to see the treasonous cowards try it, so they can be brought up on charges of terrorism or even better, dealt with permanently.

Where did you serve again?

 

No they did not. Ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion? Do you even know our history?

 

The OP is making the mistake of thinking the military would be used in such a manner. Using the U.S. military on U.S. soil against its own citizens would fracture the armed forces permanently. I don't think I would even trust the National Guard. Without a doubt, many of the servicemen would have family on the other side, to say nothing of what the officers would think individually of following such an order.

Did you watch any of the footage in Turkey? There were just too many soldiers who would not fire on their own people.

Such a conflict would be a terrible thing. There would be no winners.

 

Mussolini thought the same thing.

Norton AFB, how about you?

 

I most definitely served...and you are full of crap. If you think that every service member thinks like you do than obviously you never served. Not in a forward area.

 

This of course assume that the good old boys who form the officer corps, and no small percentage of the noncoms didn't decide to join the insurgency. You see that's the problem with most such articles. The tendency to assume that soldiers are walking automatons who will thoughtlessly do whatever they're told.

By the way that's even more true of the national guard units.

 

The Pathetic Irony is that the kinds of people who support Pols who run
cities like Baltimore and Milwaukee et.al. into the ground and allow
for Rioting and Looting and Burning are The Real Threat to this country.
Unless yer Eyes are lying to you.Trump supporters and the NRA is about
the fathest thing from what ails this once great land.
It's The democrat Party and their voting block.
Even Captain Kangaroo could see dat.

 

The WR was a response by a local group, protesting a specific tax (the first tax on a good in a new nation).

It was teething pains.

 

The mistake being made is that more than a group of fringe lunatics would take up arms against the US because Hillary Clinton was elected president. That's what's in the OP. We're not talking about an Islamic caliphate trying to establish their caliph in the US, we're talking about the legal election of a president they don't like. In that case, I doubt many family members would be on the the side of the few fringe nut bags who claim to be fighting for freedom. It's a right wing nutcase wet dream to have some sort of armed rebellion. It's fantasy, and it's a waste of time.

 

Time for a history lesson? Is the US in 2016 Italy in 1945? Have we been ruled by a facist dictator for the last 20 years? Have we been at war with the allies, on the losing side, and had half our country invaded and occupied? Have we suffered casualties over 400k, or 1% of our entire population? Here's your answer; no, no, no, and no. Your comparison is idiotic and not very well thought out.

Air Force, that figures. Hope you enjoyed your air conditioning. My first station after Ft Benning for basic was Vilseck, Germany.

 

Nidal Malik Hasan also was in the military. "Chelsea" Manning was in the military. I was not. I'm a LEO. You?

 

I guess fallujah in 2004 doesn't count as forward to you. You really believe if a small band of rednecks decided to try armed rebellion due to Hillary being elected that the military would side with them? I won't doubt your service, but I will doubt your grip on reality.

- - - Updated - - -

Bahaha that makes so much sense. Wow, all your posts and nonsense make perfect sense now. I meant serve in the military. Clearly you haven't. Writing speeding tickets and eating donuts doesn't count. Interesting that a LEO would be ok with open rebellion because someone got elected president he didn't like.

 

Another Democrat spitting on Air Force casualties.

One of my children is the Air Force. In the M.E. In aircraft flying over the M.E. Areas called "war zones." Tells us of the great dangers of combat you faced stationed in Germany.

How many Nazis did you kill in combat in Germany?

 

That fairy obvious from your posts. Therefore, all of your baseless assertions on how the military would react are null and void. So then, how would LEO's react to an open rebellion because Hillary was elected president?

 

Ah, so you are a Democrat who also spits on people in law enforcement. You're definitely in the right political party.

I've never written a speeding ticket in my life and don't eat donuts. Pretty confident I could take you with one arm tied behind my back, but then this is just a forum. You ever had to be helicopter medivac-ed for OTJ violent injuries?
I have.

And you lie. Another common trait of many Democrats. Not once did I say I advocate armed rebellion. Since you do not hesitate to post false claims, I do not believe you were ever in combat in your life. Moreso, I'm confident that those who were in combat in the army would never dare curse the Air Force given how often the Air Force has saved soldier's asses in war.

Hey, maybe you should travel to Milwaukee and join in cursing the police? From your messages sounds like you'd enjoy it. Wear your old uniform - if you have one - while doing so.

 

Well, at least one of your kids has guts. 1st Infantry Division's 3rd brigade was stationed in Germany. Hence my first duty station. I had the honor of visiting Iraq twice, and I was't safe up in an Aircraft fighting a country with no Air Force.

Oh, and you can thank your republican buddies for starting the war your kid is flying over.

 

Clearly, you're upset and unstable. So much so that you need to threaten violence.
Your belief is not required for me to be proud of my service. If you had served, perhaps you'd feel such pride as well instead of the insecurities you clearly exhibit.

You should check to see what the thread is about before launching into one of your emotional outbursts. The OP clearly refers to globalists IE Hillary and trump's call on the "2nd amendment people" in reference to Hillary appointing supreme court justices. Try to stay on topic and educate yourself before you respond further.

 

The speculation of "open rebellion" in some armed grand sense is so juvenile a perspective there is no response to such idiocy. That is not what "armed citizen" resistance is about. BUT that is a very complex topic.

Here is a real historic example from the 80s. The government was seizing farms for unpaid government loans in increasing numbers. Then, one day, an old farmer in his 60s, farm in his family for generations, wired a double barrel twelve gauge shotgun to the back of a government repossesser's head. That did cancel that day's farm auction, he didn't fire and of course arrested and prosecuted.

But this lead to hundreds of farmers declaring they were refusing to leave and would fire upon anyone trying to take their farms, barricading themselves in. The government had to decide if they wanted hundreds of armed stand-offs, wanted the publicity of killing a bunch of farm families. The answer was no, and instead a program was started to allow low interest refinancing.

THAT is what "armed resistance" is about, not millions of people grabbing rifles and attacking Washington DC. That is what a legitimate topic of "armed resistance" is about.

Only really simpleton minded people can just think in extreme absolutes that have no relationship to reality.

As for my perspective? If feds were gathering to attack a farm family in barricaded in their home to take the farm for a farm auction and I was called to participate? I'd just say "nope, won't do it."

AGAIN, historically, MANY TIMES the military of a country switched sides and joined the rebellion - both armed and unarmed. That is the story of the French Revolution and the story of the fall of the USSR, to name 2.

The American union movement is of many stories of armed resistance, where battles were lost by the union but they won the issue in the long run by the resistance, including armed resistance. Local and state police have often gone up against federal law enforcement in this country historically.

The American government would not get away with mass killing civilians for very long before the military would switch sides.

Do you read history?

 

Good Luck!

 

I threatened violence? No, I did not. Maybe some time in your safe place closet would give you better perspective and be calming.

In fact, 2A people HAVE stopped a Supreme Court nominee from taking the bench. They are doing so right now as I write this. They convinced Congress not to even hold confirmation hearings - and specifically citing the nominee opposes 2A rights. That is what Trump meant and that is exactly what is happening.

Why are so many Democrats such paranoids? Anyone says they oppose you and they run in terror unable to handle it - and then converting it to a death threat?

I noticed you didn't respond about combat and instead are trying to divert.

Why do you hate the police? Why do you hate the Air Force? What about the Navy, do you hate the Navy too?

 

If President Obama has not surrendered to Islamic radicals giving them a country there would be no need. He reduced everything everyone in the military who served in Iraq to less than nothingness in his surrendering to the Islamic radicals.

"Safe up in an Aircraft fighting a country with no Air Force?"

Hey, what happened to most of the Seal team that got Bin Laden? How did that Jordanian pilot they burned to alive in a cage get caught, being he was "safe up in aircraft?" Or those Russians "safe up in aircraft?"

You just mouth out contempt of police, people in the military, and apparently cheer ISIS best I can figure.

You have yet to answer what you do now. What do you do professionally now?

 

They called out the National Guard to help law enforcement put down a violent liberal rebellion in Milwaukee. Each state has such a Guard. So let all liberal racist hate groups take notice.