4 ms·

>What can a "well regulated militia" do against smart bullets, M1 Abrams, Apache helicopters, etc? First of all, have you seen how much of a fight low tech mil

by sosborn 12y ago

>What can a "well regulated militia" do against smart bullets, M1 Abrams, Apache helicopters, etc? First of all, have you seen how much of a fight low tech militias have put up against the U.S. lately? Secondly, don't forget that the people trained to use that technology are U.S. citizens too and will fight for their family before they fight for their county (most of them anyway).

Shivetya 12y ago
There is one thing to note about the "difficulty" the modern US military has faced versus low tech militias. The US military has been required to exercise due caution so as not to cause significant collateral damage. The trade off is lives saved today versus those lost tomorrow. If WW2 had been fought the same way it may have taken years longer. You do not end support for an enemy until you beat the population that supports them. There is no infinite number in resistance, ww2 proved that.
vacri 12y ago
There's no government that would turn the US military against the US population. It just wouldn't happen. What is happening though is the militarisation of the police, and making it more and more 'normal' for the population to accept it. The idea of a national army being turned against it's own people is hopelessly outdated in the modern, western world. There are more efficient and more subtle ways to control the population.
- walshemj 12y ago
  Read up about the bonus riots, not an episode the US military is particularly proud of I would bet.
walshemj 12y ago
They don't in most cases come out and fight - they use the most effective tactics for their lower quality troops and poorer equipment.
- sophacles 12y ago
  And an armed insurrection in the US would do different? Further, as pointed out above, anything popular enough to become a huge deal would have an awful lot of military members supporting it. The fancy gear would find it's way into the hands of both sides.

by sosborn 12y ago

Shivetya 12y ago

There is one thing to note about the "difficulty" the modern US military has faced versus low tech militias. The US military has been required to exercise due caution so as not to cause significant collateral damage. The trade off is lives saved today versus those lost tomorrow. If WW2 had been fought the same way it may have taken years longer. You do not end support for an enemy until you beat the population that supports them. There is no infinite number in resistance, ww2 proved that.

vacri 12y ago

There's no government that would turn the US military against the US population. It just wouldn't happen. What is happening though is the militarisation of the police, and making it more and more 'normal' for the population to accept it. The idea of a national army being turned against it's own people is hopelessly outdated in the modern, western world. There are more efficient and more subtle ways to control the population.

walshemj 12y ago
Read up about the bonus riots, not an episode the US military is particularly proud of I would bet.

walshemj 12y ago

They don't in most cases come out and fight - they use the most effective tactics for their lower quality troops and poorer equipment.

sophacles 12y ago
And an armed insurrection in the US would do different? Further, as pointed out above, anything popular enough to become a huge deal would have an awful lot of military members supporting it. The fancy gear would find it's way into the hands of both sides.