Revolt

[Drake_Roberts]

A multi-colored font post demonstrates that the poster is upset that in his mind he is not being sufficiently listened to.

In Mojo2 and racewright's cases, they have had nothing of worth to offer.

I was not offering a thing just testing the waters so to speak...

There will be a revolt when there is more suffering and pain felt in the masses than right now--as long as the only road to prosperity is through the government than the closer a possible coup of some kind or another is.

Myself and my children will probably not see this but my great grand children might.
My grandfather who owned several businesses 100 years ago would not understand todays
willingness to allow ones business to be controlled by others.

But as I believed there are those on this site with the same concerns--good that will delay any horrible things from happening for the not to distant future--and we will all be with the almighty before that happens--but past there???????
Thanks for all the posts--finished

PS; never would have believed that the day would come when I would have to have my background checked to by a box of 22 shells HHHMMMMMMM No to Cumo

Very true..

Americans are fat and lazy and it would take an awful lot to get any kind of revolt out of them.

Any revolt will not involve guns....too easy to bring down
A revolt would most likely be a labor revolt involving massive strikes and demonstrations

Would it be easy to bring down if millions of Americans enlisted for the rebels and a significant portion of the military did likewise?

 

[MikeK]

Things in the U.S. are nowhere near as bad as they would need to be for open rebellion to occur. In addition to the absence of sufficient provocation for rebellion to take place the increasingly divisive nature of contemporary America precludes the kind of solidarity needed to enable effective resistance to federal authority. But I'm not nearly as optimistic where the possibility of internal race war is concerned. Because reading between the lines of typical angry political rhetoric reveals that hostile reference to "liberals" is really coded language for Blacks.

Incipient provocations for race war have occurred in Los Angeles in 1965 (the Watts riot), in Brooklyn in 1991 (The Crown Heights riot), and again in Los Angeles in 1992 (the Rodney King verdict riot). The reason these eruptions remained localized and restricted mainly to property damage is because there was no violent response by militant Whites.

Although specific complaints of police brutality and discrimination are cited as having triggered these eruptions the underlying cause of unrest can be traced to depressed economic conditions in the overall Black community. In the recent past it has been possible to defuse rising anger in these communities by extending such economic concessions as increased food stamp distribution, rent assistance, child-care aid, etc., but such financial resources are becoming increasingly scarce.

 

[Borillar]

Yes and 67 68 we were more united than today but as I remember before that say 58 is the era that we need to think re kindling.
Country's enemy Yes. But Domestic enemy is more difficult to recognize.


That's the point we wasted time fighting the COMMIES and maybe we should have been spending more resources fighting the domestic enemies.

I took up arms fighting the foreign enemy--I would take up arms to fight the domestic enemy
that some day might be needed.
Would you not take up arms to fight the domestic enemy's if needed??

In the 50s and 60s we had terrorists bombing schools and churches. Lynching, arson, intimidation. We had state sponsored tyranny looking the other way as terrorists ran rampant.

Yet you look longingly back to that time and whine that we need to rise up against the government for.....ready?.....I'm serious here.......forcing people to get healthcare

You are propagandizing.

It isn't about healthcare.

It's about Obama snatching our freedom from us. It's about Obama changing us from being the boss of our government, to our being bossed BY our government.

He seeks to make us all subjects of his rule.

We said no to tyranny in the original Tea Party in Boston.

Now, we have a 21st Century Tea Party to do the exact same thing.

To throw off tyranny.

Oh, please... How is Obama any different than any of the last 40 odd predecessors? We have never been the boss of our government. All we have ever had was the ballot box to pick the boss of our choosing. Obama hasn't changed shit. I saw the biggest changes under Bush II. Now you need a passport to go to freaking Canada. TSA feels you up whenever you fly, and spy agencies know everything about you.

 

[Victory67]

All true soldiers with any sense of honor will respect their chain of command.

 

[9thIDdoc]

All true Americans protect and defend the Constitution above all else.

 

[9thIDdoc]

All true Americans honor the Constitution above all else.

 

[Victory67]

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

I think we all can see how any honorable and honest soldier will behave.

 

[Victory67]

Interesting article about the issue of following orders a military person believes to be illegal.

To Obey or Not to Obey

 

[Drake_Roberts]

All true Americans protect and defend the Constitution above all else.

What about against the government that swears to uphold it, but blatantly tramples on it? Who would the soldiers stand with then? The government or the Constitution?

 

[Victory67]

What about against the government that swears to uphold it, but blatantly tramples on it? Who would the soldiers stand with then? The government or the Constitution?

Soldiers do not have to follow illegal orders, such as to kill civilians or torture POWs.

If a group of Americans decides to declare war against the US government due to gay marriage, Obamacare, gun background checks, and abortion, you bet your ass the National Guard is obligated to fight such people and kill them if they refuse to surrender.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

What about against the government that swears to uphold it, but blatantly tramples on it? Who would the soldiers stand with then? The government or the Constitution?

Soldiers do not have to follow illegal orders, such as to kill civilians or torture POWs.

And to tie it all back to the OP, what if the citizens revolt because of unconstitutional injustices forced upon them? Would the military fire on those defending the constitution they swore to protect or the evil government they swore to protect?

 

[Victory67]

What about against the government that swears to uphold it, but blatantly tramples on it? Who would the soldiers stand with then? The government or the Constitution?

Soldiers do not have to follow illegal orders, such as to kill civilians or torture POWs.

And to tie it all back to the OP, what if the citizens revolt because of unconstitutional injustices forced upon them? Would the military fire on those defending the constitution they swore to protect or the evil government they swore to protect?

See above.

If a group of Americans decides to wage war against the government due to Obamacare, gun background checks, Roe v Wade, and Social Security, National Guard troops would be obliged to follow all orders to fight such people and kill them if they refuse to surrender.

 

[Victory67]

I forgot to add that National Guardsmen would also be obliged to fight Americans who revolted over Obama's use of Executive Power to raise the minimum wage for Federal contractors.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

Soldiers do not have to follow illegal orders, such as to kill civilians or torture POWs.

And to tie it all back to the OP, what if the citizens revolt because of unconstitutional injustices forced upon them? Would the military fire on those defending the constitution they swore to protect or the evil government they swore to protect?

See above.

If a group of Americans decides to wage war against the government due to Obamacare, gun background checks, Roe v Wade, and Social Security, National Guard troops would be obliged to follow all orders to fight such people and kill them if they refuse to surrender.

Sorry, I posted before your edit. But I was referring to things like spying on phone records, corruption, bypassing congress on just about everything, restricting freedom of speech for those who oppose the decay and corruption of Washington. What then?

 

[Victory67]

Sorry, I posted before your edit. But I was referring to things like spying on phone records, corruption, bypassing congress on just about everything, restricting freedom of speech for those who oppose the decay and corruption of Washington. What then?

Revolt is not justified as long as the democratic process is still active and available to all Americans to use.

Giving up on the democratic process and wanting to use violence to enact political change, when democratic change is still very possible and available, is called terrorism.

The National Guard of course has the right to fight and even kill terrorists.

The American people have become very lazy and content in their couches, tv's, and smartphones.

We used to protest all the time in order to demand peaceful change. We used to vote in much higher numbers.

Not anymore. But we can again.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

Sorry, I posted before your edit. But I was referring to things like spying on phone records, corruption, bypassing congress on just about everything, restricting freedom of speech for those who oppose the decay and corruption of Washington. What then?

Revolt is not justified as long as the democratic process is still active and available to all Americans to use.

Giving up on the democratic process and wanting to use violence to enact political change, when democratic change is still very possible and available, is called terrorism.

The National Guard of course has the right to fight and even kill terrorists.

The American people have become very lazy and content in their couches, tv's, and smartphones.

We used to protest all the time in order to demand peaceful change. We used to vote in much higher numbers.

Not anymore. But we can again.

And when it becomes obvious that no matter who we elect, the government will still try to increase their own wallet size while the people suffer? That voting is no longer a feasible solution?
So the military would kill people who fight to protect and safeguard their rights?

 

[Victory67]

We could demand a Constitutional Amendment calling for a national referendum system.

We could demand a Constitutional Amendment calling for a process for the people to recall a sitting President.

We could demand all the changes we want and threaten to kick politicians out of office if they don't comply.

But if the people are lazy and don't stand up and demand change with their feet and their votes, nothing will change.

A lazy American populace is no excuse for violent terrorism.

 

[Victory67]

And when it becomes obvious that no matter who we elect, the government will still try to increase their own wallet size while the people suffer? That voting is no longer a feasible solution?
So the military would kill people who fight to protect and safeguard their rights?

Obvious to who? .01% of the American population?

.01% of the American population using violence to impose their will upon the American people is called TERRORISM and will certainly and swiftly be put down by local, State, Federal police and the National Guard.

So kindly put your John Rambo fantasies away cause they aint gonna happen.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

And when it becomes obvious that no matter who we elect, the government will still try to increase their own wallet size while the people suffer? That voting is no longer a feasible solution?
So the military would kill people who fight to protect and safeguard their rights?

Obvious to who? .01% of the American population?

.01% of the American population using violence to impose their will upon the American people is called TERRORISM and will certainly and swiftly be put down by local, State, Federal police and the National Guard.

So kindly put your John Rambo fantasies away cause they aint gonna happen.

I don't plan on fighting a large scale war now. If America is saved through democratic means, I'll go lock up my firearms and pray I never have cause to use them, except for target practice if I'm bored. But if America keeps spiraling I'll have no choice. And I don't plan on starting large. I plan on starting small. Things semi-legal that I probably would be able to get away with if I was apprehended. Utilizing my freedom of speech, for example. And keep getting larger and larger. But by no means will I fire the first shot. No, I'll let the military do it in defense of the government into a crowd of protestors. Then I fight.

 

[Victory67]

I don't plan on fighting a large scale war now. If America is saved through democratic means, I'll go lock up my firearms and pray I never have cause to use them, except for target practice if I'm bored. But if America keeps spiraling I'll have no choice. And I don't plan on starting large. I plan on starting small. Things semi-legal that I probably would be able to get away with if I was apprehended. Utilizing my freedom of speech, for example. And keep getting larger and larger. But by no means will I fire the first shot. No, I'll let the military do it in defense of the government into a crowd of protestors. Then I fight.

Talking about acts of political violence, even small ones, on an open public forum like this is a very stupid thing to do.

You must just be looking for attention.