ISIS and Hamas haven’t actually accomplished anything. Not exactly worth emulating.
If we want to emulate the Taliban, we’d have to go hide out in Mexico until the Trump administration gives up and gifts us our country back. Somehow I don’t think that would work out for us quite so well.
The Taliban did operate in a lot of open desert areas as well and had marginal success, I would assume that American people would be better armed than the Taliban and you’d probably see US military or National guard guys stealing and supplying the militia groups if it got serious. Look at Ukraine as well a lot of flat farmlands and Russia even with all of their equipment has a hard time pushing forward, and they just zerg.
What a strange response. You’re essentially telling me that if I don’t follow the line then I’m alienating others as if there were only one valid position.
Time to check out a history book or two. With that attitude, US would still be a colony of Britain. Or the US would’ve won in Vietnam instead of getting kicked out by the locals. Granted, it is a bit different without an ocean in between, but it could still happen. Or we could break up like what happened to the USSR.
The real question is how many people you are willing to sacrifice for this. How many cities are you willing to burn down?
Nah that’s not the right question. Talking like that makes you sound like a federal agent trying to entrap people. A better question might be who and what stands in the way of helping the people and how can we address those problems? But that is far less attention grabbing and harder to answer.
The purpose of an armed resistance isn’t a direct confrontation with an armed force. It’s the death of a thousand logistical cuts. It’s bleeding the country’s economy dry by disrupting the commerce required to keep daily life running smoothly and crippling the regime’s forces by making people afraid to sign up - one way or another. Whether that’s neighborhoods chasing ICE out or people finding out where cops and soldiers live and “paying them a visit” in the dead of night. An armed resistance’s goal is to simply be too big of a thorn to ignore but too entrenched and evasive to be worth the amount of money and effort it would take to catch them. Even just their existence in the media is a form of warfare. By simply being in the news they show a population that the regime can be resisted, even by just a bunch of people with guns.
Look at Napoleon’s war in Russia in 1812 and his massive losses due to poor supply lines, disease, and the Russians scorched earth policy ahead of the fierce Russian winter. Or to the American Revolution, where a bunch of farmers with guns and the financial backing of France became such a thorn in the side of the British Empire that they became one of the most powerful and obnoxious countries of the past two centuries and are the subject that started this whole conversation.
You can turn your guns on the entire country’s population, but then what? You’re going to have a hard time keeping troops loyal when it’s their friends and family on the other side of the gun, and terrorizing the population like that will make it impossible to keep the propaganda machine going. You’d be forced to rule through direct oppression, which would breed more resentment and more people willing to pick up a gun and fight back. Your only hope is to convince the discontent population that opposition is pointless and the true believers that you are right.
What you are suggesting is really shared terrorism where both sides keep committing war crimes. Oh, actually, that sounds like any war the US has been involved with so I guess that works.
The fact is it is possible to fight back against a stronger foe and win if it comes to that. Again I am responding to your original comment. I think most sane people stuck in the US right now are aware that we’re living in a tinderbox. To be clear I didn’t suggest anything I just simply stated through anecdotal evidence that it is possible to stand up to a larger force and win. Like everyone else I don’t want harm to come to the people I love but that’s not always something we can choose.
How many innocents will they take from us if we do nothing?
Who are “they”? Who are you fighting against exactly? You’re not happy with a small historical bump and are crying about fighting against tyranny. So, who are you going to oppose here?
You are separated from reality and have never lived under harsh conditions. It all sounds like fun and games until your children starve in front of you and you can’t do anything about it since all systems have broken down.
The largest armed forces had hospitals been very bad with dealing with insurgency. It can crush a national military in days. An armed populace is just a quagmire it has little ability to deal with
I have never understood how some think that people with guns can withstand the largest armed forces on the planet.
Yeah, that’s why there’s no more Taliban. Or ISIS. Or Hamas. Or …
ISIS and Hamas haven’t actually accomplished anything. Not exactly worth emulating.
If we want to emulate the Taliban, we’d have to go hide out in Mexico until the Trump administration gives up and gifts us our country back. Somehow I don’t think that would work out for us quite so well.
Those things still exist.
Fucking duh, that’s his fucking point
The Taliban has Guns and Mountains though, so only the Rockies and the Appalachians stand a chance. The Midwest would get rolled so hard.
Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba and - in the short term - a bunch of Native American tribespeople have also beaten the USA army
The Taliban did operate in a lot of open desert areas as well and had marginal success, I would assume that American people would be better armed than the Taliban and you’d probably see US military or National guard guys stealing and supplying the militia groups if it got serious. Look at Ukraine as well a lot of flat farmlands and Russia even with all of their equipment has a hard time pushing forward, and they just zerg.
They also never relied on social media provided by US-based corporations (and with built-in back doors) for their organization and communications.
You’re apparently offended quite easily by simple rhetoric.
I interpreted the response as frustration with stupidity.
It’s not good rhetoric if it alienates people.
What a strange response. You’re essentially telling me that if I don’t follow the line then I’m alienating others as if there were only one valid position.
I’m not talking about “a line” but if a whole bunch of people downvote you that means you failed to convince them which is the point of rhetoric.
Time to check out a history book or two. With that attitude, US would still be a colony of Britain. Or the US would’ve won in Vietnam instead of getting kicked out by the locals. Granted, it is a bit different without an ocean in between, but it could still happen. Or we could break up like what happened to the USSR.
We’d be better off if we were still a colony. Independence was rally just a larger version of January 6 with equally suspicious symbols.
The real question is how many people you are willing to sacrifice for this. How many cities are you willing to burn down?
Then leave and go suck some monarch dick?
I mean Canada still has the British royalty if that’s their kink. Not sure how it would help but I ain’t gonna kink shame.
You consider fellatio a kink? I kinda feel bad for you…
With a king, yes it’s power play for sure.
Welp you got me
Yeah you’re all sorts of toxic. Exactly how many of my comments are you stalking? I won’t see the rest because I just blocked you.
What a little bitch, Lemmy ain’t a big place. His main character syndrome is strong.
Maybe so there is really no way to tell.
Nah that’s not the right question. Talking like that makes you sound like a federal agent trying to entrap people. A better question might be who and what stands in the way of helping the people and how can we address those problems? But that is far less attention grabbing and harder to answer.
The purpose of an armed resistance isn’t a direct confrontation with an armed force. It’s the death of a thousand logistical cuts. It’s bleeding the country’s economy dry by disrupting the commerce required to keep daily life running smoothly and crippling the regime’s forces by making people afraid to sign up - one way or another. Whether that’s neighborhoods chasing ICE out or people finding out where cops and soldiers live and “paying them a visit” in the dead of night. An armed resistance’s goal is to simply be too big of a thorn to ignore but too entrenched and evasive to be worth the amount of money and effort it would take to catch them. Even just their existence in the media is a form of warfare. By simply being in the news they show a population that the regime can be resisted, even by just a bunch of people with guns.
Look at Napoleon’s war in Russia in 1812 and his massive losses due to poor supply lines, disease, and the Russians scorched earth policy ahead of the fierce Russian winter. Or to the American Revolution, where a bunch of farmers with guns and the financial backing of France became such a thorn in the side of the British Empire that they became one of the most powerful and obnoxious countries of the past two centuries and are the subject that started this whole conversation.
You can turn your guns on the entire country’s population, but then what? You’re going to have a hard time keeping troops loyal when it’s their friends and family on the other side of the gun, and terrorizing the population like that will make it impossible to keep the propaganda machine going. You’d be forced to rule through direct oppression, which would breed more resentment and more people willing to pick up a gun and fight back. Your only hope is to convince the discontent population that opposition is pointless and the true believers that you are right.
Vietnam
How many are you willing to sacrifice?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#Casualties
Long line of US vets in my family and I’ve heard over and over never underestimate gorilla warfare
What you are suggesting is really shared terrorism where both sides keep committing war crimes. Oh, actually, that sounds like any war the US has been involved with so I guess that works.
The fact is it is possible to fight back against a stronger foe and win if it comes to that. Again I am responding to your original comment. I think most sane people stuck in the US right now are aware that we’re living in a tinderbox. To be clear I didn’t suggest anything I just simply stated through anecdotal evidence that it is possible to stand up to a larger force and win. Like everyone else I don’t want harm to come to the people I love but that’s not always something we can choose.
Myself, in defense.
You would not be the only causality.
One hopes.
How many innocents will they take from us if we do nothing?
Who are they?
I’m sorry. I thought we were talking about defense against fascists. Were you against that?
Who are “they”? Who are you fighting against exactly? You’re not happy with a small historical bump and are crying about fighting against tyranny. So, who are you going to oppose here?
Same way people with guns stood against us for like 20 years.
And died in the process. By the tens of millions.
And stood.
Better die fighting fascism than live under it.
You are separated from reality and have never lived under harsh conditions. It all sounds like fun and games until your children starve in front of you and you can’t do anything about it since all systems have broken down.
“Harsh conditions” is what happens when you live under fascism. If you die fighting it, you don’t live under harsh conditions, you’re dead.
Same with you.
The largest armed forces had hospitals been very bad with dealing with insurgency. It can crush a national military in days. An armed populace is just a quagmire it has little ability to deal with
Why don’t you ask those guys in Vietnam about that? Or Afghanistan, for that matter.
It wasn’t just guns though. In Vietnam, it was traps, tunnels, jungle terrain, etc. And in Iraq/Afghanistan, they used IEDs and suicide bombers…
Insurgency is possible, but it’s very costly. And you’d need more than just firearms.