Violent overthrow is very popular these days but I don't think people realize how dangerous it is, not just in the conflict itself, but how easily things can go wrong and how easily you can end up with a new government that is worse than before. I haven't heard anyone suggest how such an uprising could be done properly to avoid these pitfalls.
Before a violent overthrow can have legitimacy, there are several things that need to be done first:
There needs to be a listing and public declaration/release of specific grievances against the current government. This should include examples and evidence backing up these claims.
There needs to be a re-affirming of the principles, values and rights of those who are publishing the grievances. It needs to be clear who this movement consists of, what their values are, and why they believe these grievances to be legitimate.
There needs to be a clear statement of intentions and a path forward in order to remedy the situation. This should always be a non-violent solution to begin with, but make it clear that justified violence will be used if there is insufficient relief given.
Only once remedy of grievances is denied by government should the next step be taken, namely violence to overthrow the oppressive government and bring relief to those oppressed.
Not that I'm aware of... not in any clear and substantive way with sufficient support behind it. If that support doesn't exist then this effort is dead in the water.
Just paint targets on our back.
No.
I'm not talking about doxing specific individuals. I'm talking about making sure everyone involved understands who this movement consists of and what they believe. Remember, many other people are watching and trying to decide which side to support.
You've never read our founding documents, apparently. Restoring the US Constitution to the highest law of the land should be the obvious resolution. We don't have anything better.
Restoring the U.S. Constitution is the destination, not the path to reach the destination.
Fuck it. America is a gigantic country. Nobody is ever doing a successful ground invasion on the US. It'd be them vs a half a billion heavily armed lunatics who will think the world is ending.
I say let's balkanize and then sort it out. I propose the Midwest secedes and leave the coasts to starve.
Unfortunately, ground invasions in the modern world will follow bombardment, most likely by a nuclear strike. A ground invasion may fail, but only after they've nuked half the country. I'd say that's the worst-case scenario but it's not improbable if the USA continues down the current path.
Nobody's nuking half the country. Why would you irradiate the land you're trying to conquer? Also, that would have to be a LOT of nuclear bombs and would lead to global nuclear annihilation.
Are you American? Have you been to America? This country is mind-bendingly huge with literally every type of climate and geography. Frankly it takes like 5+ hours to fly across the country with a lot of lateral space. You would need thousands and thousands of planes and pilots to even attempt an air invasion. Not to mention the thousands of miles of ocean between us and the rest of the world.
We also have a gigantic -- maybe the biggest -- stockpile of weapons on the planet. If things get as loose as we're suggesting, I'd estimate it would be giant blocs of militias holding ground.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about the US. Any army that would stretch their supply line 5000 miles and across an ocean onto incredibly hostile territory -- including a type of urban and suburban warfare that has never been approached before -- is going to die before the tail makes it to land.
Nobody's nuking half the country. Why would you irradiate the land you're trying to conquer? Also, that would have to be a LOT of nuclear bombs and would lead to global nuclear annihilation.
Are you American? Have you been to America? This country is mind-bendingly huge with literally every type of climate and geography. Frankly it takes like 5+ hours to fly across the country with a lot of lateral space. You would need thousands and thousands of planes and pilots to even attempt an air invasion. Not to mention the thousands of miles of ocean between us and the rest of the world.
We also have a gigantic -- maybe the biggest -- stockpile of weapons on the planet. If things get as loose as we're suggesting, I'd estimate it would be giant blocs of militias holding ground.
All-out warfare in the modern area is all about disabling your enemy with first strike nuclear capability. Hypothetically if China or some other country wanted to attack us, it would start with a nuclear strike on key cities and bases to disable our chain of command and make it difficult or impossible to retaliate. Obviously if they failed they would pay dearly but if it was successful and they manage to evade our early detection system, we'd be mostly helpless from that point forward.
The primary targets would be places like Washington D.C., The Pentagon and any nuclear silos or nuclear capable ships or submarines that they know about. Secondary targets would be the various forts and other non-nuclear military installations across the country. Third would be major cities in key states where there's a strong state government, police force and national guard. Fourth would probably be power-plants across the country, although this might not be necessary.
Once this is done, the only purpose for a ground invasion at this point would be to take our natural resources --- oil, mineral deposits, farmland, forestry, etc. -- which are massive. This obviously requires a huge effort to control these areas, but they may try if it's important enough. That said, yes, I agree any ground invasion of this sort would most likely ultimately fail due to the tremendous resistance from a well-armed populace.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about the US. Any army that would stretch their supply line 5000 miles and across an ocean onto incredibly hostile territory -- including a type of urban and suburban warfare that has never been approached before -- is going to die before the tail makes it to land.
It all depends on the first strike. This isn't like Pearl Harbor. We live in an age of hyper-sonic intercontinental ballistic missiles that can destroy entire cities at a time. Air invasions wouldn't even be necessary except to mop up any resistance afterwards.
I'm not trying to scare anyone; this is all hypothetical after all. I'm just explaining how it could be done. I think people are too complacent and take our military strength for granted. It's important to realize that while our technological prowess remains unmatched in the world, Leftists have been working hard to weaken us by purging the ranks of anyone who doesn't think like them, removing leadership who oppose their idiotic social justice programs and even kicking out soldiers who refuse the vaccine mandates.
You can have all the military technology in the world, but when your soldiers and generals are Leftists who hate our country anyways, are they really going to put their lives on the line and do what is necessary to win? Even if they were willing, are they capable? I sincerely doubt it.
Violent overthrow is very popular these days but I don't think people realize how dangerous it is, not just in the conflict itself, but how easily things can go wrong and how easily you can end up with a new government that is worse than before. I haven't heard anyone suggest how such an uprising could be done properly to avoid these pitfalls.
Before a violent overthrow can have legitimacy, there are several things that need to be done first:
There needs to be a listing and public declaration/release of specific grievances against the current government. This should include examples and evidence backing up these claims.
There needs to be a re-affirming of the principles, values and rights of those who are publishing the grievances. It needs to be clear who this movement consists of, what their values are, and why they believe these grievances to be legitimate.
There needs to be a clear statement of intentions and a path forward in order to remedy the situation. This should always be a non-violent solution to begin with, but make it clear that justified violence will be used if there is insufficient relief given.
Only once remedy of grievances is denied by government should the next step be taken, namely violence to overthrow the oppressive government and bring relief to those oppressed.
Not that I'm aware of... not in any clear and substantive way with sufficient support behind it. If that support doesn't exist then this effort is dead in the water.
I'm not talking about doxing specific individuals. I'm talking about making sure everyone involved understands who this movement consists of and what they believe. Remember, many other people are watching and trying to decide which side to support.
Restoring the U.S. Constitution is the destination, not the path to reach the destination.
Fuck it. America is a gigantic country. Nobody is ever doing a successful ground invasion on the US. It'd be them vs a half a billion heavily armed lunatics who will think the world is ending.
I say let's balkanize and then sort it out. I propose the Midwest secedes and leave the coasts to starve.
Unfortunately, ground invasions in the modern world will follow bombardment, most likely by a nuclear strike. A ground invasion may fail, but only after they've nuked half the country. I'd say that's the worst-case scenario but it's not improbable if the USA continues down the current path.
Nobody's nuking half the country. Why would you irradiate the land you're trying to conquer? Also, that would have to be a LOT of nuclear bombs and would lead to global nuclear annihilation.
Are you American? Have you been to America? This country is mind-bendingly huge with literally every type of climate and geography. Frankly it takes like 5+ hours to fly across the country with a lot of lateral space. You would need thousands and thousands of planes and pilots to even attempt an air invasion. Not to mention the thousands of miles of ocean between us and the rest of the world.
We also have a gigantic -- maybe the biggest -- stockpile of weapons on the planet. If things get as loose as we're suggesting, I'd estimate it would be giant blocs of militias holding ground.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about the US. Any army that would stretch their supply line 5000 miles and across an ocean onto incredibly hostile territory -- including a type of urban and suburban warfare that has never been approached before -- is going to die before the tail makes it to land.
All-out warfare in the modern area is all about disabling your enemy with first strike nuclear capability. Hypothetically if China or some other country wanted to attack us, it would start with a nuclear strike on key cities and bases to disable our chain of command and make it difficult or impossible to retaliate. Obviously if they failed they would pay dearly but if it was successful and they manage to evade our early detection system, we'd be mostly helpless from that point forward.
The primary targets would be places like Washington D.C., The Pentagon and any nuclear silos or nuclear capable ships or submarines that they know about. Secondary targets would be the various forts and other non-nuclear military installations across the country. Third would be major cities in key states where there's a strong state government, police force and national guard. Fourth would probably be power-plants across the country, although this might not be necessary.
Once this is done, the only purpose for a ground invasion at this point would be to take our natural resources --- oil, mineral deposits, farmland, forestry, etc. -- which are massive. This obviously requires a huge effort to control these areas, but they may try if it's important enough. That said, yes, I agree any ground invasion of this sort would most likely ultimately fail due to the tremendous resistance from a well-armed populace.
It all depends on the first strike. This isn't like Pearl Harbor. We live in an age of hyper-sonic intercontinental ballistic missiles that can destroy entire cities at a time. Air invasions wouldn't even be necessary except to mop up any resistance afterwards.
I'm not trying to scare anyone; this is all hypothetical after all. I'm just explaining how it could be done. I think people are too complacent and take our military strength for granted. It's important to realize that while our technological prowess remains unmatched in the world, Leftists have been working hard to weaken us by purging the ranks of anyone who doesn't think like them, removing leadership who oppose their idiotic social justice programs and even kicking out soldiers who refuse the vaccine mandates.
You can have all the military technology in the world, but when your soldiers and generals are Leftists who hate our country anyways, are they really going to put their lives on the line and do what is necessary to win? Even if they were willing, are they capable? I sincerely doubt it.