You're viewing a single thread.
Well as long as we'll have guns then things can be turned around...
Lol, as if their Wal Mart rifles are going to help them against reaper drones.
The USA loses to people less armed than the USA all the time.
But it would be an easy war of attrition no? How many died/almost died because Texas couldn't handle a lil iced? How long could those states last without resources from outside? How much of their materials are usable raw?
Do the "much guns" states actually have a decent bit of knowledgeable people? Being able to shoot a gun is fine and all but a war is far more than that.
The biggest worry would probably be the ones already in the military who could/would easily sabotage any efforts. And yes, drones are easily beating rifles when it comes to depleting each other's resources.
I know fuck-all about guns and war but my armchair is warmed up.
The US won all nearly all their engagements in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The difference was the lack of public support to keep those wars and occupations going.
You would think that the public wouldn't support a war the US wages on the public.
When half the people want it, it will.
This is it.
People keep insisting that the populace would win a war of populace against state... maybe it would, I don't know and it's not the problem.
The problem is a war of half the populace against the state and the other half of the populace. Fascism is carried into power by popular demand, it's not like one day they just appear on the levers of power and have to put up with a revolting population. They will have been put there by the population, and it will be the better armed half of the population.
The war on drugs has entered the chat
It can be done with guns or it can be done without. Can is the magic word here, and guns are optional.
You’re gonna need a nuke, big guy. You aren’t taking on the American military with your lil pea shooter.