Check m8, ameripoors

How is your 2nd amendment gonna protect you from tyranny when the government has nukes, tanks, jets and missiles?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=I6BFarrICWs
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#North_Vietnamese.2C_Viet_Cong.2C_and_Khmer_Rouge_war_crimes
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

...

JUST

Nukes, tanks, jets and missiles are not really effective at population control. They are not that useful in a civil war scenario unless you want to exterminate half of your population.
That is assuming the military stays on the side of the government.

For me it is more about protecting me from niggers entering my home.

Missles can't patrol a street.
Nukes can't enforce martial law.
Jet's can't establish a curfew.
Tanks can't search a house.

How is your diversity going, Scandicuck? Who's going to protect you from Islamic terror?

Pro-tip: No one! HAHAHAHA

The fact that the government might have to use that level of force would become their undoing.
Those who serve in the military, provide their personal security, do all the mundane jobs in their life, and even LEO to a degree would strike out against those who would use the military against our own people.

If I had received orders to harm Americans (in open rebellion or not) while serving, I'd have killed the highest people in my chain of command I had access to that were willing to carry out such an order.
I don't think I'm all that special.

The president would likely be offer by one of his own guard.

stale bait

...

>Tanks can't search a house.
A tank did that during the Waco siege lel

Yes, because it's so practical for the government to bomb it's own citizens, because don't pay them or anything.

>implying they won't overrun the bases and take the drones tanks and planes

Are you sure though user that there wouldn't be a propaganda campaign with it? Such as this American terrorist group is trying to undermine government control we need to exterminate them etc.

Refer to Vietnam War

>Let's level an entire suburban neighborhood to kill a guy with an AR15

>That will get people on our side and further our agenda

America doesn't have the best record when against guerilla warfare.

>America couldn't beat a bunch of poor illiterate rice farmers in vietnam
>America couldn't beat a bunch of poor poppy farmers in Afghanistan

>The military is made up of the people

You do know that every time you make this thread, more and more people are going to see the "red-team planners cap", and are going to ever be more aware of their own power.

Or was that your plan all along?

I'm just curious if it is the same guy that posts this every day.

At this point, it has to be a pro-2A troll.

>It's another tanks and planes can win wars thread

how is your nothing going to protect you?

yeah, thats why the government with all their infinite technology can't even defeat Rice Farmers and Cave dwelling Islamists even with support from the local populace and their tax dollars.

Its truly impossible for a local populace to stand up against the local government!
SUBMIT NOW AND FOREVER!
t. CIA

>the government is going to nuke its own population like nothing would happen

LMFAO

Lets shoot up soldures and cops to fight the tyranny.
Media paints you to the masses you are a terrorist,
Even if you live ( you probably won't) you spend the rest of you life in ADX prison

I don't care if you have an AR-15 but they aren't going to protect you from the government.

They are better than nothing, and the idea is that small arms are used in order to get access to larger arms.

>How is your 2nd amendment gonna protect you from tyranny when the government has nukes, tanks, jets and missiles?
By making the ones in power have to shoot at inocent people

Do they train soldiers to kill innocent people?

look mom I posted it again

Because the people with said nukes tanks jets and missiles are the ones who pledged to be first to spill tyrannical blood.

Also, studies show upwards of 70+% will abandon military post. That means - ding ding ding no one for tanks drones planes.

See, you don't fight the cops and soldiers head on

You go after the people in charge ie the politicians

They would gain nothing from a civil war, "they" meaning whatever you want to believe. The last Bastion of society would collapse which is America because I'm not gunna go to Commie land, the free market rules and nobody will enforce the debts we owe.

>Rice Farmers
Yeah you don't know shit about the Veit Cong nor the NVA, never mind the USA couldn't invade North Vietnam without risking war with China, an possible WWIII
>Cave Dwellers.
Doesn't look like they beat us at all. We just got tired of babysitting.

Rifles can get you access to bigger weapons.

And a lot of civilians are veterans that given access to those weapons, can and would use them in a state of civil war. Think of them as the minimum required to effectively bootstrap yourself to a fully armed resistance.

>look mom

>implying
That the US military would actually attack its own citizens instead of the people wanting their families and friends dead.

This is working under the assumption that

>The military and law enforcement communities wouldn't fracture if they tried to impose martial law.
>The states would all cooperate.

Also using the total war approach on your own populace is bad for morale and the economy.

Few things have unified a country more that shooting the president. Although with this election that might be different.

Why not.. police do it all the time.. once you dehumanize the populous, the military has no problem oppressing people.

>Vietnam, Al Queda and ISIS don't exist

it worked for vietnam

aannnnddd on to the list you go

How do people not get this? Is our technology so advanced that people think it runs on magic and that our tanks/planes/artillery aren't operated by humans?

Look at what one pissed off guy with a rifle did to the cops in Dallas
Now multiply that with the 10s of millions of gun owners if the government tries to go full retard.

And it wouldn't just stop with the actual soldiers and police either.
Civil wars are nasty. If you try to turn me into a criminal overnight, and try to take my lawfully owned guns, I will act like a criminal. You try to oppress me, I'll fucking cut your children's throats in their sleep.

rekt

>goverment would blow it's own country up

its*

Tyrannical governments let evil mobs run free (e.g. Black Lives Matter).

How is a white man supposed to protect his family from a screeching, howling black mob without a semiautomatic rifle?

>people in power want to remain in power

This

SO VOTE ON OR YOU LUSE

no power without a country tho

>those will be used against their own citizens
Literally uneducated and gullible. If they used those things on citizens there would be outrage across the world. I don't know why these threads are allowed.

No power if the government you run is overthrown either champ...

>fight and maybe retain power by force
>surrender and lose all power

Its not rocket surgery.

The military would side with the government because no armed revolution will be able to have a massive core support at the start without being detected by the NSA/other Govmt surveillance (which funny enough qualifies as tyranny but I dont see anyone rushing to arms). Without a centralized support, every media station across America would be able to effortlessly paint the revolution as domestic terrorism as soon as shots get fired. And Im sure we both know how much of a boner US soldiers have for popping anyone labelled as a terrorist.

JUST

youtube.com/watch?v=I6BFarrICWs

Oh Boy, do i have News for you...

You seem to imply our military would go after civilians. They would most likely turn and kill the tyrants instead.

Because America isn't Europe.

That scenario is on it's bigger lines realistic, but there is so much bullshit in that post that is totally unbelievable.

1. Japan never had intention of invading continental US. They simply lacked means to do so. Their war plan was essentially gamble to destroy US Navy and take over Asia and hope that US wants to avoid war so much that it will simply give up. Gamble kinda failed.

2. Predicting how big part of military would defect is impossible to predict without knowing what political, social or other factor is the triggering event in civil war. Citizens would be divided, probably along more than one fault line as would be military. There is good chance that good deal of military would simply tell both civilian government and rebels to fuck off and remain neutral.

3. One SEAL or Ranger will need a supply chain and whole lot of other stuff to train hundreds of civilians into effective rebel militia.

4. Russia.... top fucking kek.

5. Civilian firearms would become non issue after very short time once civil disturbance begings.

>Dude Bros
You know he's emasculated.

...

Basically my loadout in Insurgency.

...

JUST

I own guns to protect myself from my fellow citizens, not the govt.

and to hunt

see what happened in leningrad. a million people starved to death

that was less than 100 years ago

you think it can't happen again?

Remember that time someone used an assault rifle in a mass murder and the government responded with police and swat and NOT jets and drones

The Arabs have been successfully fighting asymmetric wars for decades now.

Gorilla warfare seens to be doing a good job at holding them back in the middle east

...

>implying the soldiers and cops won't be behind you

>implying the US Government would ever nuke it's own country, short a zombie holocaust
Yeah nah. As a combat veteran, I can tell you we hate the government just as much as the next guy - we hate doing stupid shit for no reason.

they kinda are, except the nuclear part
.50 BMG rounds are most often used to disable civilian vehicles, destroy buildings, destroy enemy materiel, and that's just the round itself. Missles will take down any stronghold, tanks provide cover fire and MORE anti-tank power, supersonic fighters are among the most dangerous. Name one fucking civilian with access to a F-22
Rise up and see how fucking fast you'll lose

XMb8

It's deterrence you fucking faggot.

The same reason why loud big kids are rarely bullied in gradeschool but little quiet runts always are.

D E T E R R E N C E

As long as humans need to enforce laws, and as long as humans fear for their lives and fear being injured. Guns will dissuade a tyrannical government.

All that shit in OP's pic is super fucking expensive and would be wasteful to use on a guy living in his own house not bothering anyone.

in full out civil war, russia and china isn't gonna save mr gunowner
literally the only reason we've lost vietnam/have extreme prudence in warefare is because
A. The enemy is at home
B. The enemy is backed by 2 superpowers

You forget that all of our nuclear submarines, carriers, warships, supersonic jets, cruiser missles, nuclear weapons, and firepower are already fucking built moron
"super fucking expensive" isn't really an issue since it's already built, only the ammunition and maintenance require funds
>guy living in his own house not bothering anyone
that same guy killed 6 cops

>gorilla warfare
>gorilla

You dumb or something, boy?

No, but they might supply the rebels if it looked like the rebels had a chance of at least beating the government down hard enough to keep it out of their hair in the future.

sure did work in the middle east right op?

Yes, the government is massively overpowered when it comes to both hardware and training, however, if they have atleast some common sence, they will never want to destroy more than what is necessary to take out the opposition. Killing non-combatants is not only a war crime and a crime against humanity, destroying (non militarized) civillian property comes with massive costs. Redrawing powergrids, water, waste, roads, etc. Not to mention the general cleanup. Getting rid of rubble, bodies and left over materials.

Done right, a militia armed with little more than AR-15s could have a great success in overthrowing the government. Just look at how much ass was handed to the americans in the vietnam.

>WE WUZ GUN GRABBERS N SHEEEEIT!!

>killing non-combatants is not only a war crime [..]
who ever mentioned that?
Militia are not civilians
also read
we lost because we never fully invaded
we just patrolled with and supported the south
why? because should we invade it would spark the 3rd world war

>look mom I posted it again

Sorry, NSA. You're fucked.

They have upkeeps, they have people manning them. people who can fuck off at any given time.

Ammo, etc

>What was Vietnam and Afghanistan

Yes.
And before you comment on the women & children being armed,what do you think jackbooted thugs would be encountering when they were going door to door looking for the "resistance "?

What are you talking about?
Aren't you turning in your guns bru?
Don't you want america to be as safe as Mexico?

are people who post this shit trolling or are they legitimately this dumb? We go over this like 5 times a fucking day

No way this is real. Source?

as a leaf you have no idea the esprit de corps soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines have
no one really deserts anymore and should such an uprising happen only a small number
This "uprising" would be nothing more than a riot, looking back the national guard would probably just set up martial law, tanks start patrol the streets, numerous soldiers are outfitted with anti riot gear and a couple of low altitude fighter flights will take place just to intimidate

Decades ago.
>Implying military can't deal with single shooters by now

It's true. You're just lucky that Britain really didn't give a shit about the colonies, and that the American Revolution was simply a proxy war for Britain and France.

>Be America
>Spend Millions (if not billions) bombing the middle east
>terrorists armed with nothing but IEDs and AKs that have be drug thru the desert for half a century
>occupation leads to more radicalism then ever
Tell me again how jets win wars against a defiant local populace?

they cant nuke themselves and the military would be on the rebellions side

Oh it's real bro. This is what American police practice. Shooting women, children and the elderly.

Not even a troll the simple truth. The targets are called "no more hesitation" targets, because they don't want the American police to have any hesitation when it comes to shooting civilian men women and children.

And people don't understand why we need guns.

...

The military would never fight Americans.

> not paying attention to recent global events where a military coup was thwarted by largely unarmed civilians (with the occasional erdogan under cover operative packing an Uzi)

Inb4 coup conspiracy theories.... my point still stands

Post it in /k/, sweetheart

>>killing non-combatants is not only a war crime [..]
>who ever mentioned that?
>Militia are not civilians

Using A10s, tanks or nukes in a densely populated area USUALLY results in collateral damage. just look at US drone statistics.

>also read
Southvietnam side 1,490,000 wounded 807,311 dead.
Northvietnam side 608,200 wounded 1,170,476 dead.

Your side, US troops and others, had better training and funding. by all these things considered, you should have won.

Also, how is 536,100 strong NOT considered an invasion?

Sources: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#North_Vietnamese.2C_Viet_Cong.2C_and_Khmer_Rouge_war_crimes

Feel free to correct me