6 ms·

While I feel unrest could start there, I doubt it would persist. The army and national guard are just too well equipped and organized to deal with the problem.

by cbanek 10y ago

While I feel unrest could start there, I doubt it would persist. The army and national guard are just too well equipped and organized to deal with the problem. I'd put my money on 1,000 national guard troops vs 10,000 random Texans with guns. This doesn't even get into larger military hardware, such as planes and drones with missiles. Sure, people will die, and it would be a tragedy. It may move the political needle, but I doubt it would be some kind of meaningful uprising. As a larger point, I think this diminishes the chances of a "french revolution" style revolution in general, where the huge masses of poor people revolt against the rich. The poor are not well equipped or organized in general, and military technology is increasingly becoming more powerful and longer range. Just think if the richest people were protected by working ED-209's that responded to their command. Even if we had the other 99% fighting them, could they really win?

makomk 10y ago
Guess which communities the national guard and the army recruited those troops from. If it ever comes to that, you're expecting soldiers to shoot and kill people just like them, people whose friends and family they may well have served with, people who - if things had gone a little differently - could have been them or their friends and family. This would likely not end well.
- bookmarkacc 10y ago
  Hey would do it. Soldiers are not trained to think about how they are similiar to their enemies.
  - 67726e 10y ago
    They're also not trained to fight their neighbors.
- cbanek 10y ago
  It's true, it wouldn't start well or end well. But using military equipment at a long range, like a drone, does add a dehumanizing component. And killing people that are just like you is really the nastiest part of any civil war (since both sides are very culturally similar), but it doesn't seem to stop the killing.
- meheleventyone 10y ago
  This seems naive. People will happily fight others just like them and from similar backgrounds for all sorts of reasons. Civil Wars are infamous for it. "Brother against brother".
- slededit 10y ago
  Are we talking about the same national guard that mowed down unarmed students in the Kent State massacre? You'd be surprised what strong structure can cause a person to do. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
  - Gargoyle 10y ago
    Well, more the National Guard that's literally the same people as the armed rednecks in rural Texas. Keep in mind the National Guard are the "weekend warriors", only now many of them have months/years in actual combat zones and have returned to their home communities with those skills. Not to mention this whole argument assumes the government isn't siding with the insurrection. Sounds like an odd point to make, but if there was a substantial redneck revolution, which side is Trump's government on? Who will be labeled the rebels? It's incredibly risky to assume who is on which side of an actual civil war scale uprising. The chances of being wrong are very high, and the consequences are literally life and death.
  - jdietrich 10y ago
    Liberal students are them. A group of angry patriots, many of whom are likely to be veterans themselves, are much more likely to be considered us.
Merad 10y ago
What do you think these guys are going to do, line up and wait to be carpet bombed? Guys who are essentially illiterate farmers have managed to keep insurgencies going against the US military for around 15 years in Iraq/Afghanistan. There's not an unreasonable chance that the dumb rednecks of Texas could do as well. But, these guys aren't all dumb rednecks - they're going to have support from a decent amount of people with US military, national guard, police, etc. experience. No one is claiming that they're going to march on DC and take over the country, but they could certainly turn sections of the US into something akin to the Syria/Iraq civil war situation.
- cbanek 10y ago
  I'm not saying they're dumb, you're right many people will have law enforcement and military experience. But they simply won't be equipped and supplied like normal forces, and I think that's the key difference. And yes, I agree that there could be a strong resistance movement to whatever happens by armed citizens, since guns are everywhere.
  - smileysteve 10y ago
    Viet Cong, French Indian War, George Washington, County Jones, and Benjamin Martin are just a few times in American History where a lack of arms or training did not result as you're expecting.
    - ryanmarsh 10y ago
      It's amazing how quickly you can teach someone how to handle themselves in a combat situation when their life depends on it. We're talking days.
      - pottersbasilisk 10y ago
        Yea, I can tell you its already happening in PA.
    - flukus 10y ago
eru 10y ago
You should read up on your French Revolution. It wasn't the poorest who revolted the most.
ryanmarsh 10y ago
Love all the arm chair generals. I would rather be one of 10,000 random Texans with guns than 1,000 national guard. 10:1 are horrible odds in an urban environment against well resourced, well equipped, intelligent insurgents. Houston for instance is full of chemical engineers, tradesmen, software engineers, and all around handy outdoorsy people. You clearly have no concept of how hard it would be to occupy and hold such a place against such an enemy. I tried to hold territory in Baghdad amongst people who couldn't even shoot straight and we were regular army not weekend warriors and it sucked. It was unpredictable and constantly dangerous. Nope.
- exclusiv 10y ago
  If 10k Texans organized to start some sort of rebellion we'd certainly put forth more resources to address that. Nobody needs combat experience in Baghdad or first-hand economic knowledge of Houston to know that Texas would have no chance of succeeding in their civil unrest if it did happen under your feared scenario. On a side note, I've hunted with Texans before and they put up deer feeders that make noises when they spit out food to draw in the game for easy shots. They also import exotic animals from Africa and stuff them on fenced private property. I don't call that hunting.
  - remarkEon 10y ago
    >Nobody needs combat experience in Baghdad or first-hand economic knowledge of Houston to know that Texas would have no chance of succeeding in their civil unrest if it did happen under your feared scenario. Uhhh. I'd check the confidence at the door, here. Places in Iraq (and Afghanistan, where I was) were full of folks who were basically peasants and they utterly baffled us in their commitment and ability to make war. I would absolutely dread fighting an insurgency against a bunch of well armed, well educated, well trained, and freakishly devoted Texans.
    - exclusiv 10y ago
      Are you saying Texans would succeed? You didn't argue my notion that they wouldn't, just stated that it wouldn't be pleasant. EDIT: @remarkEon that's ridiculous. We have ~ 1.5M active troops. Drones, aircraft, firepower and heavy surveillance which these Texans don't have. This is not Baghdad or Afghanistan geographically or politically; it's our turf and everyone would rally around crushing any rogue Texans. Some of you are worried about 10k Texans in some crazy hypothetical situation where they get disgruntled due to lack of job prospects like its the first time that ever happened to the south. Then someone says North Korea is not a threat. I yield. @remarkEon's history of the US: Scrappily defeats the Redcoats and turns a country into a superpower in a mere 150 years. Survives a Great Depression. Takes down Hitler, the Axis of Evil, Osama Bin Laden. Helps overthrow several dictatorships. Builds the most powerful military in history. Avoids nuclear war with North Korea and other dictatorships. Does not fall due to over extension like most great empires. Ultimate demise: 10k Texans with deer rifles.
Spooky23 10y ago
I'd bet on 1,000 national guard troops refusing to mobilize, and military refusing to follow civilian leadership.
wcummings 10y ago
It's not about defeating the national guard or whoever outright, it's about being able to resist them long enough to attract defectors from the military and start a civil war.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by cbanek 10y ago

makomk 10y ago

Guess which communities the national guard and the army recruited those troops from. If it ever comes to that, you're expecting soldiers to shoot and kill people just like them, people whose friends and family they may well have served with, people who - if things had gone a little differently - could have been them or their friends and family. This would likely not end well.

bookmarkacc 10y ago
Hey would do it. Soldiers are not trained to think about how they are similiar to their enemies.
- 67726e 10y ago
  They're also not trained to fight their neighbors.
cbanek 10y ago
It's true, it wouldn't start well or end well. But using military equipment at a long range, like a drone, does add a dehumanizing component. And killing people that are just like you is really the nastiest part of any civil war (since both sides are very culturally similar), but it doesn't seem to stop the killing.
meheleventyone 10y ago
This seems naive. People will happily fight others just like them and from similar backgrounds for all sorts of reasons. Civil Wars are infamous for it. "Brother against brother".
slededit 10y ago
Are we talking about the same national guard that mowed down unarmed students in the Kent State massacre? You'd be surprised what strong structure can cause a person to do. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
- Gargoyle 10y ago
  Well, more the National Guard that's literally the same people as the armed rednecks in rural Texas. Keep in mind the National Guard are the "weekend warriors", only now many of them have months/years in actual combat zones and have returned to their home communities with those skills. Not to mention this whole argument assumes the government isn't siding with the insurrection. Sounds like an odd point to make, but if there was a substantial redneck revolution, which side is Trump's government on? Who will be labeled the rebels? It's incredibly risky to assume who is on which side of an actual civil war scale uprising. The chances of being wrong are very high, and the consequences are literally life and death.
- jdietrich 10y ago
  Liberal students are them. A group of angry patriots, many of whom are likely to be veterans themselves, are much more likely to be considered us.

Merad 10y ago

What do you think these guys are going to do, line up and wait to be carpet bombed? Guys who are essentially illiterate farmers have managed to keep insurgencies going against the US military for around 15 years in Iraq/Afghanistan. There's not an unreasonable chance that the dumb rednecks of Texas could do as well. But, these guys aren't all dumb rednecks - they're going to have support from a decent amount of people with US military, national guard, police, etc. experience. No one is claiming that they're going to march on DC and take over the country, but they could certainly turn sections of the US into something akin to the Syria/Iraq civil war situation.

cbanek 10y ago
I'm not saying they're dumb, you're right many people will have law enforcement and military experience. But they simply won't be equipped and supplied like normal forces, and I think that's the key difference. And yes, I agree that there could be a strong resistance movement to whatever happens by armed citizens, since guns are everywhere.
- smileysteve 10y ago
  Viet Cong, French Indian War, George Washington, County Jones, and Benjamin Martin are just a few times in American History where a lack of arms or training did not result as you're expecting.
  - ryanmarsh 10y ago
    It's amazing how quickly you can teach someone how to handle themselves in a combat situation when their life depends on it. We're talking days.
    - pottersbasilisk 10y ago
      Yea, I can tell you its already happening in PA.
  - flukus 10y ago

eru 10y ago

You should read up on your French Revolution. It wasn't the poorest who revolted the most.

ryanmarsh 10y ago

Love all the arm chair generals. I would rather be one of 10,000 random Texans with guns than 1,000 national guard. 10:1 are horrible odds in an urban environment against well resourced, well equipped, intelligent insurgents. Houston for instance is full of chemical engineers, tradesmen, software engineers, and all around handy outdoorsy people. You clearly have no concept of how hard it would be to occupy and hold such a place against such an enemy. I tried to hold territory in Baghdad amongst people who couldn't even shoot straight and we were regular army not weekend warriors and it sucked. It was unpredictable and constantly dangerous. Nope.

exclusiv 10y ago
If 10k Texans organized to start some sort of rebellion we'd certainly put forth more resources to address that. Nobody needs combat experience in Baghdad or first-hand economic knowledge of Houston to know that Texas would have no chance of succeeding in their civil unrest if it did happen under your feared scenario. On a side note, I've hunted with Texans before and they put up deer feeders that make noises when they spit out food to draw in the game for easy shots. They also import exotic animals from Africa and stuff them on fenced private property. I don't call that hunting.
- remarkEon 10y ago
  >Nobody needs combat experience in Baghdad or first-hand economic knowledge of Houston to know that Texas would have no chance of succeeding in their civil unrest if it did happen under your feared scenario. Uhhh. I'd check the confidence at the door, here. Places in Iraq (and Afghanistan, where I was) were full of folks who were basically peasants and they utterly baffled us in their commitment and ability to make war. I would absolutely dread fighting an insurgency against a bunch of well armed, well educated, well trained, and freakishly devoted Texans.
  - exclusiv 10y ago
    Are you saying Texans would succeed? You didn't argue my notion that they wouldn't, just stated that it wouldn't be pleasant. EDIT: @remarkEon that's ridiculous. We have ~ 1.5M active troops. Drones, aircraft, firepower and heavy surveillance which these Texans don't have. This is not Baghdad or Afghanistan geographically or politically; it's our turf and everyone would rally around crushing any rogue Texans. Some of you are worried about 10k Texans in some crazy hypothetical situation where they get disgruntled due to lack of job prospects like its the first time that ever happened to the south. Then someone says North Korea is not a threat. I yield. @remarkEon's history of the US: Scrappily defeats the Redcoats and turns a country into a superpower in a mere 150 years. Survives a Great Depression. Takes down Hitler, the Axis of Evil, Osama Bin Laden. Helps overthrow several dictatorships. Builds the most powerful military in history. Avoids nuclear war with North Korea and other dictatorships. Does not fall due to over extension like most great empires. Ultimate demise: 10k Texans with deer rifles.

Spooky23 10y ago

I'd bet on 1,000 national guard troops refusing to mobilize, and military refusing to follow civilian leadership.

wcummings 10y ago

It's not about defeating the national guard or whoever outright, it's about being able to resist them long enough to attract defectors from the military and start a civil war.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]