When was the last time...

[tylerdolphin]

If you had a knowledge of history, you would know that it is very relevant. If anything, it is more relevant today than it was back when they wrote the Bill of Rights. Guess who the most notorious mass murderers are throughout history? Government. Thousands of deaths pale in comparison to the quarter of a billion deaths over the last century.

I have a better grasp on history than the average person, I think. But in this case, there is no historical example that accurately describes what an American rebellion would be like. To compare it to other past historical events is to strip away context and only compare it on a very very basic level, which really isnt accurate.

[Breed]

. . . there is no historical example that accurately describes what an American rebellion would be like.

I've stated as much.

To compare it to other past historical events is to strip away context and only compare it on a very very basic level, which really isnt accurate.

Even when history repeats itself, it never comes back exactly the same. All one can do is look at certain key elements and draw comparisons from there.

[tylerdolphin]

Even when history repeats itself, it never comes back exactly the same. All one can do is look at certain key elements and draw comparisons from there.

What key elements? There would be very few similarities IMO.

[Dolphins9954]

We can go back and fourth about americans standing a chance against this government. It still doesn't change the fact that the founders wanted us to have that fighting chance.

[Dolphins9954]

I think the Cuban revolution would be a good example. Castro and company were totally outmatched and outgunned especially after Batista's successful ambush. Which left over 2/3 of his men dead and barely any guns. Castro actually had more men than guns after that and still lead a successful campaign against a tyrant that we were supporting.

[Bumpus]

WOW. Looks like my drunk ass missed a spirited discussion last night while watching the Pens get smacked.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


After catching up on the thread, I have to say that some of you are underestimating the will of the American people.



Land of the Free. Home of the Brave.

IDK about you, but those words mean something to me.

[NY8123]

...a country successfully fought a tyrannical government with violence? Does anyone know? It came up in conversation recently, and the only example we could even think of was the American Revolution. And even that started non-violently (The Boston Massacre) which outraged the colonies, and led to us getting a lot of international support due to the brutality of it. International supports that we needed, otherwise we may still be British to this day.

But seriously, think about it. What have been the most successful protests in recent memory? The civil rights movement? We still see Martin Luther King and his fellow protestors referenced to this day. They had dogs unleashed on them, they were beaten with billy clubs, and they were sprayed with fire hoses. They didn't fight back. They took it, stood their ground, and the police came out being the villains. No one argues won that MLK ultimately won that conflict. There are dozens of examples of the peaceful approach historically being successful.

Or how about more recently? We have probably the best example of the 2 ways to protest going on as we speak: Egypt and Syria. Anyone remember those police officers firing into the crowd of protestors in Egypt? They gunned down hundreds of unarmed civilians. What happened? The person who gave the orders to fire was arrested, tried, and is now in prison. The protestors have international support due to the outrage from the world who heard about it. Most importantly, there has not been civil war, yet we are seeing significant progress. Now look at Syria. The protestors shot back. Now we have something like 50,000 civilians dead, the "rebels" are scattered, and the government now has reason to be ruthlessly brutal with their population.

So, with the primary argument being that we need the exact same weapons the military has to protect ourselves from a potentially tyrannical government, is that really pragmatic? Even if we went to war with a dictator in 20 years, history shows that by shooting back, not only does the uprising almost always get put down, but history shows them as the wrong party in the conflict. So, again I ask, does anyone have any examples of violent rebellions successfully removing a tyrant...?

Without the support of the US air force and the US arming those against the government in question, it seldom works. It wouldn't have worked in the case of the US if it wasn't for the French and Spanish. The Taliban is actually a perfect example of this, they successfully fought off the second largest army in the world because the largest army in the world was funneling weapons and supplies in at an astronomical rate. Then fast forward 30 years and without the support of the largest army in the world they get bombed into hiding.

Vietnam is another shining example the other way.

Personally I'd rather die fighting, it is just who I am. A bullet to the head is quick good death, unlike half the disease waiting to kill me in my later years.

[Dolphins9954]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[MoFinz]

Where does everyone get this call for rebellion from? We have the opportunity to rebel, every 4-6 years. An armed rebellion would only come from government oppression. If the US govt said "we're taking your guns, we're monitoring your internet, you can't resist", then you will see the will and fortitude of the American people.....

Oh wait, those things are already happening?

Nevermind.

You only have to look back to the War between the States to see how a smaller, outgunned and outmanned army (the south) can take it to a well equipped and superior supplied aggressor. 4 years. And the south damn near won. Despite a weaker manufacturing industry, despite the Norths superior numbers and armaments. One of the most lopsided and bloody defeats the Union suffered was at the Battle of Cold Harbor. 108k vs 59k, and Lee wiped the field with Grant. It matters when you put it into the context you seek. Brother vs. brother, cause vs. cause, even a army half your size is hard to defeat when you add in those 2 factors. How much stomach would a soldier have to kill a US citizen when he's being ordered to do so by the government leaders that fear the people? Its not someone with a different skin tone or a different language on different soil. We are all Americans here.

[Bumpus]

...a country successfully fought a tyrannical government with violence? Does anyone know? It came up in conversation recently, and the only example we could even think of was the American Revolution. And even that started non-violently (The Boston Massacre) which outraged the colonies, and led to us getting a lot of international support due to the brutality of it. International supports that we needed, otherwise we may still be British to this day.

But seriously, think about it. What have been the most successful protests in recent memory? The civil rights movement? We still see Martin Luther King and his fellow protestors referenced to this day. They had dogs unleashed on them, they were beaten with billy clubs, and they were sprayed with fire hoses. They didn't fight back. They took it, stood their ground, and the police came out being the villains. No one argues won that MLK ultimately won that conflict. There are dozens of examples of the peaceful approach historically being successful.

Or how about more recently? We have probably the best example of the 2 ways to protest going on as we speak: Egypt and Syria. Anyone remember those police officers firing into the crowd of protestors in Egypt? They gunned down hundreds of unarmed civilians. What happened? The person who gave the orders to fire was arrested, tried, and is now in prison. The protestors have international support due to the outrage from the world who heard about it. Most importantly, there has not been civil war, yet we are seeing significant progress. Now look at Syria. The protestors shot back. Now we have something like 50,000 civilians dead, the "rebels" are scattered, and the government now has reason to be ruthlessly brutal with their population.

So, with the primary argument being that we need the exact same weapons the military has to protect ourselves from a potentially tyrannical government, is that really pragmatic? Even if we went to war with a dictator in 20 years, history shows that by shooting back, not only does the uprising almost always get put down, but history shows them as the wrong party in the conflict. So, again I ask, does anyone have any examples of violent rebellions successfully removing a tyrant...?

Actually, there you go. Why would you even need another example?