I remember when the argument used to be our founding fathers didn’t forsee weapons like modern machine guns and therefore wouldn’t have expected them to be owned by private individuals. Setting aside cannons and warships were owned by private individuals at the time; those that think SpaceX is Musk might want to consider his ballistic missile capabilities.
I also suspect this same Congressman applauds Ukraine’s use of drones against Russia without further thought to what it means to his other arguments.
One of the things mentioned is military fighting their own neighbors and family. While the useful idiots bragging about military power in the article won’t have a clue, the scum rising to the top of an authoritarian government will have a much better idea. My take: expect to see soldiers engaged in such shenanigans to come from other parts of the country, and probably opposite sides of the rural/urban divide.
The urban recruit from the east coast will be collecting firearms in Arizona while the rural recruit from Arizona will be doing the same in Baltimore. When that fails, then they’ll be hiring a lot of foreign mercenaries.
When it starts to matter where you’re from when you’re deployed in the US, then that will be another warning sign.
What do you think all the new legal and illegal immigrants are for?
I think they’re to supply workers either as a cheap labor source or to keep entitlement programs going a few years more. No way anyone pro-immigration is planning that far ahead to think of them as a military resource in some future civil war.
The typical UN mission is a bunch of troops hired out from an African warlord who wants to keep more troops than he can pay. The UN usually hires a Western officer in command of the mission.
Unsurprisingly the UN peacekeepers aren’t all that good.
There wouldn’t be enough if it were done officially. Presently there’s around 100k peacekeepers in the world. That might cover a big city, but not the whole country. They’d have to hire a huge number of mercenaries anyway. And I doubt giving them a blue helmet would give them enough propaganda advantage to be worth the overhead of including the UN, even tangentially.
I remember when the argument used to be our founding fathers didn’t forsee weapons like modern machine guns and therefore wouldn’t have expected them to be owned by private individuals. Setting aside cannons and warships were owned by private individuals at the time; those that think SpaceX is Musk might want to consider his ballistic missile capabilities.
I also suspect this same Congressman applauds Ukraine’s use of drones against Russia without further thought to what it means to his other arguments.
I wonder which other parts of the Constitution he considers obsolete.
You already know, all of them unless they are useful in the moment.
It isn’t that Democrats don’t believe in human rights, they just don’t believe non-Democrats are human.
Yes, and your humanity depends on how closely you follow the current official party line.
Let’s put that dipshit Congressperson behind the console of an Apache gunship and see how far he/she gets.
Where do they think Apache jockeys come from? France?
While Larry’s articles (the linked site) are always worth reading, it should be noted that this one is from 2018.
Ah, well, I just ran across it on X. It’s aged well.
One of the things mentioned is military fighting their own neighbors and family. While the useful idiots bragging about military power in the article won’t have a clue, the scum rising to the top of an authoritarian government will have a much better idea. My take: expect to see soldiers engaged in such shenanigans to come from other parts of the country, and probably opposite sides of the rural/urban divide.
The urban recruit from the east coast will be collecting firearms in Arizona while the rural recruit from Arizona will be doing the same in Baltimore. When that fails, then they’ll be hiring a lot of foreign mercenaries.
When it starts to matter where you’re from when you’re deployed in the US, then that will be another warning sign.
“When that fails, then they’ll be hiring a lot of foreign mercenaries.”
What do you think all the new legal and illegal immigrants are for?
What do you think all the new legal and illegal immigrants are for?
I think they’re to supply workers either as a cheap labor source or to keep entitlement programs going a few years more. No way anyone pro-immigration is planning that far ahead to think of them as a military resource in some future civil war.
They might even bring in UN troops. Then it will be open season, no bag limit, on Blue Helmets.
That will work out well.
The typical UN mission is a bunch of troops hired out from an African warlord who wants to keep more troops than he can pay. The UN usually hires a Western officer in command of the mission.
Unsurprisingly the UN peacekeepers aren’t all that good.
There wouldn’t be enough if it were done officially. Presently there’s around 100k peacekeepers in the world. That might cover a big city, but not the whole country. They’d have to hire a huge number of mercenaries anyway. And I doubt giving them a blue helmet would give them enough propaganda advantage to be worth the overhead of including the UN, even tangentially.
It always seems to me that this stupid argument works just as well in reverse: If the government has nukes, why are you so worried we have handguns?
Nice
https://soldiersystems.net/2013/03/28/2nd-amendment-and-the-kool-aid-drinkers-by-paul-howe/
Navy Seal Paul Howe’s evergreen fisk of this nonsense.