Depends. More of them died than us.
Gun control Reframing the Issue as a National Security Imperative’
- Thread starter livingston
- Start date
Depends. More of them died than us.
WW2 says otherwise.
So by your logic the Taliban should have been eliminated by the Russians. And yet here we are all these years later. Unless you think those tanks are going to blast down an entire apartment building just to stop the "Government labelled insurgents" on the fourth floor?
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
And citizens have learned a lot from the sand rats.
repete
.338 Win Mag
Tanks and planes need crews and support and room to move, also are you assuming that ONLY the Gvmt will have them?
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
I know where there's a couple armored vehicles owned by civilians, one being an Abrams
Based on history, yes. In any meaningful numbers anyways.
That's actually pretty awesome.I know where there's a couple armored vehicles owned by civilians, one being an Abrams
No all I was really saying is if someone thinks the govt. would just roll over because some civis showed up with some guns then that someone is nuts. A bunch of rag taggers from meal team 6 ain't gonna do shit against a tank.
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Gun control IS a national security issue. That is why the 2md amendment is there.
Oh really? What's the average joe know about guerrilla fighting? I bet they know their favorite NFL team's roster better.
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
After 9-11 plenty have learned what 5he sand rats have done, and those willing to learn will be taught by those of us who know well.
Maybe. Maybe not.
First you have to assume that the tank crew is actually willing to attack american civilians.
Then you have to remember that American civilians are the most heavily armed citizen army in the world, many of whom are veterans. Many of them have earned doctorate levels of experience in combat and insurgency.
So take that tank, which odds are the locals will know where it came from. They know where the local bases and depot's are.
Those tank crew live somewhere. They have families. Especially if it's guard/reserve units they will all be out in the community living in neighborhoods.
That tank needs fuel. It needs logistical support. It needs replenishment. Supply lines are fragile. Those fuel truck drivers live somewhere. The locals know what roads they would transport their fuel trucks on. They have homes and families too.
Look how difficult it's been to pacify afghanistan or Iraq. Now imagine those some afghani militants running loose in America with the knowledge on how to break the system and hit their oppressors in vulnerable locations and at home etc. I'm trying to make a hypothetical point to think outside the box. Use real world examples from recent conflicts that it's not so simple as just lining a tank up blasting everything.
If it's a "shooting war" it would get ugly and brutal very very fast. No one wants that.
Etc...
I'm not going to spend 20 mins explaining why it's impossible for the US government to pacify a determined american citizenry.
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
1 free man defending his home is more powerful than 10 hired soldiers. Infantrymen on foot found many ways to disable tanks and other artillery over the years. Tanks are not invincible. Remember that just a 3% of a rag tag group of patriots defeated the most powerful nation on earth about 250 years ago as well.
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
From an internet "acquaintance" type, I know of hundreds who have some privately owned heavy shit. There's much more battle equipment in private hands than most think. Some of ammunition may be tricky to get ahold of but theives are resourceful.
Their acceptance of losses was greater than ours. Once again, despite killing more of them we are the ones that are departing.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
And yet they are running the country and we are leaving.
We killed a lot more Vietnamese than they killed of us. I guess we won that one too ?
Germany killed *way* more allied soldiers than they ever lost (you can thank Stalin for that). Did they win WWII ?
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
As well as ROE, they didn't have any.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Why would they fight a tank ?
Tank rolls in, militia arranges to be elsewhere.
There are enough tanks to cover approx .00000001% of the US land. The militia has plenty of room to avoid them.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
WW2 ended because the Nazis were utterly eliminated (genocide) and Japanese decided they were tired of getting their asses kicked.
Not before.
The Japanese surrendered. There were no Nazis left to fight after WWII.
The Germans were unable to defeat the French despite having an absolute monopoly on military power in all of France, and a legendary willingness to use it as ruthlessly as possible.
TEOTWAWKI inc.
.338 Win Mag
The last several posts in this thread should be enough to make someone from the government make a phone call as they realize reading it caused them to sit uncomfortably in their chair. Without a single threat, we can begin to cause fear - and rightly so. I believe there are more than enough angry citizens to make our grievances heard, and if they continue to be ignored, both sides shall be in agreement, there must be a war.
Deplorable Me
.700 Nitro Express
I did an economic analysis and in the long run it would be cheaper to do a group buy on a third world country in a better climate. Something with costal beaches and mountains. No islands and no volcanoes.
Tintalieau
.40 S&W
but we could throw commies in a volcano.......have to have outdoor activites
Deplorable Me
.700 Nitro Express
We'd have to import them.
Loophole = anything a politician doesnt like
Volcanos get grumpy when disturbed.