What You’ll See In The Rebellion

[frenchman]

what the **** is happening in here? i come into this seven pages in and it's a dick-measuring contest complete with pictures of MC ink?

related: went to a BBQ with a bunch of MCs/members last year. super friendly, good beer and eats... though i think some of them are currently trying to kill each other now. too bad.

There was no dick measuring contest at all. I understand that Michael is a little carefull with people on the web claiming this and that. Way too many of them out there. I just thought I show him that I am legit, so he could see that I indeed know what I am talking about. No bad blood here, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[atilla]

it's still a bad idea to post stuff like that on a place like this. to think that you're not under someone's watchful eye now at least would be extremely naive.

 

[Terminator03]

Guys, I get it. THe IRA fights guerilla style against a big government et all. But.. They are terrorists. No honor. Bombing innocent people. Are these the guys who you want to identify yourself with? Really?
This country is apparently at the same point then mine was, in 1789. What happened then, was horrible. Good on one side, but there have been a lot of atrocities as well. Just get a translation of the lyrics of the french anthem, and you will see what I mean.
I would refuse to side with people who can even relate to scumbags who are bombing train stations, killing women and children in the name of freedom. Show me an objective that makes sense, in a military way, with armed opponents in a combattant status, and I'll think about it. But I wouldn't lower myself to side with people who do the wrong, and horrible things.

I get what you are saying, but "all is fair in love and war" comes into play here. Anyone opposing the established government is ALWAYS considered to be a terrorist, so that terminology is meaningless in this context. We would also be considered domestic terrorists (very much like the IRA) for standing our ground if it comes to that, and yes, there will always be collateral damage, such is the price of ANY war regardless of where it is fought. How many women and children have been killed by our troops over the past 10, or so years? Should our government troops be considered terrorists because innocent people have been killed? See why your logic is flawed?

 

[frenchman]

Anyone opposing the established government is ALWAYS considered to be a terrorist.... We would also be considered domestic terrorists (very much like the IRA) for standing our ground if it comes to that,...

So, why is it that people here believe that the military will side with them? They have sworn the oath to protect the constitution for ennemies, foreign and domestic. Wouldn't you say that being a terrorist qualifies you as such?
I don't see a flaw in my logic at all. If I'd fight, I'd side with men of honor only to do that. There's no honor in bombing civilians. There's no honor in killing defenseless children and women. That would make me as bad as this Lanza guy. I would simply refuse to fight for the man on my right, and the man on my left, if these guys would bring a terrorist mindset to the game. I am speaking for myself only. The ends DO NOT justify any means. Not for me, I try to be better then that.

 

[Terminator03]

So, why is it that people here believe that the military will side with them? They have sworn the oath to protect the constitution for ennemies, foreign and domestic. Wouldn't you say that being a terrorist qualifies you as such?
I don't see a flaw in my logic at all. If I'd fight, I'd side with men of honor only to do that. There's no honor in bombing civilians. There's no honor in killing defenseless children and women. That would make me as bad as this Lanza guy. I would simply refuse to fight for the man on my right, and the man on my left, if these guys would bring a terrorist mindset to the game. I am speaking for myself only. The ends DO NOT justify any means. Not for me, I try to be better then that.

Once again, I see and acknowledge your point, especially the one regarding the military and their view of us. I seriously hope that NONE of what's being postulated here ever comes to pass but if it does, I do believe that guerrilla tactics aka terrorist methodology will be the only way that we will be able to survive. I don't think that anyone here would advocate for what you point out as dishonorable acts, but like I said before, if the the .gov lights the match, the powder keg will blow, and unfortunately there will be collateral damage on all sides. That fact is inescapable in war.

 

[Picton]

I dunno. There are worse things than being dead, and being a terrorist is probably one of them. Blame the .gov all you wish; in the end, if you cause collateral damage, it's still you causing it. You, ultimately, have to choose whether to act like a decent human being or not. I do respect your views; I just find it tough to share them.

 

[MichaelJR]

I dunno. There are worse things than being dead, and being a terrorist is probably one of them. Blame the .gov all you wish; in the end, if you cause collateral damage, it's still you causing it. You, ultimately, have to choose whether to act like a decent human being or not. I do respect your views; I just find it tough to share them.

So if our backs were against the wall, you'd turn over your constitution and bow to your masters?


"Send it" like chinalfr from my can attached to a string from another can in the lair of the dark lord kramdar.

 

[namedpipes]

Clearly NES has been invaded . . .

 

[Terminator03]

I dunno. There are worse things than being dead, and being a terrorist is probably one of them. Blame the .gov all you wish; in the end, if you cause collateral damage, it's still you causing it. You, ultimately, have to choose whether to act like a decent human being or not. I do respect your views; I just find it tough to share them.

It's not necessarily "my view", but we have to be realistic about this. If things do in deed go south, we will all only have 2 choices to make. Give in and relinquish our rights, or battle to retain them. If anyone chooses the later, then the lines can, and will get blurred quickly. Anyone who thinks that it can be any other way is kidding themselves. This really has nothing to do with making choices about being decent human beings, as I believe that we all would choose to NOT hurt anyone, especially innocent people, but in ANY battle, that is an unfortunate byproduct. And like I said, if anyone chooses not to roll over when the time comes, they should EXPECT to be labeled as terrorists, at least by the government and the media, even if they know in their hearts that they are patriots.

 

[Picton]

So if our backs were against the wall, you'd turn over your constitution and bow to your masters?

Call it what you want. We've all got to live with ourselves at the end of the day. Despite what I'm sure you think, none of us really knows for sure just how far he/she will go under the dire circumstances you seem to enjoy considering. Make your own choice.

I once got deployed to the kind of place this thread seems to want America to turn into. I've seen and smelled what happens when people forget they're humans and go on rampages. It's not something I'd want to be a part of. YMMV.

 

[namedpipes]

Clearly NES has been invaded . . .

 

[Timber]

So if our backs were against the wall, you'd turn over your constitution and bow to your masters?

You can't be both a true Jeffersonian "libertarian," -or "Classical Liberal-," and a Constitutionalist. The two intellectual propositions are mutually incompatible.

 

[Gak44]

I dunno. There are worse things than being dead, and being a terrorist is probably one of them. Blame the .gov all you wish; in the end, if you cause collateral damage, it's still you causing it. You, ultimately, have to choose whether to act like a decent human being or not. I do respect your views; I just find it tough to share them.

I have to disagree with you. If the so called gov. forces us to act like terrorists to defend ouselves, then all the deaths of innocent people that occurs will be on its head, not ours.

 

[Picton]

I have to disagree with you. If the so called gov. forces us to act like terrorists to defend ouselves, then all the deaths of innocent people that occurs will be on its head, not ours.

Please do; disagreement doesn't bother me. You don't need to justify your actions to anyone but yourself and, perhaps, an eventual war-crimes tribunal someplace. My guns are for defending myself against people actively shooting at me; I've got no interest in targeting people. That's what a BOB and a bolt-hole in rural Vermont are for. Or better yet, Wyoming. And nobody can "force" you to act like a terrorist, IMO.

 

[rkwjunior]

Clearly NES has been invaded . . .

Find me a video that is not butchered, and defines a "gun confiscation" not an "evacuation" manipulated into being a "gun confiscation".

I find it very funny that all you people are crying about a potential Gun Ban, when not one of u gave a crap about these peoples guns "supposidly" being "confiscated".

Bend over and take it again!

The news showed me a video saying Assault rifles are Evil, so they must be evil.

 

[namedpipes]

Troll.

 

[MichaelJR]

Call it what you want. We've all got to live with ourselves at the end of the day. Despite what I'm sure you think, none of us really knows for sure just how far he/she will go under the dire circumstances you seem to enjoy considering. Make your own choice.

I once got deployed to the kind of place this thread seems to want America to turn into. I've seen and smelled what happens when people forget they're humans and go on rampages. It's not something I'd want to be a part of. YMMV.

I agree, nobody knows what they will do until it comes down to that final moment. We can only hope that we wont choke up and can deal with what it entails.


"Send it" like chinalfr from my can attached to a string from another can in the lair of the dark lord kramdar.

 

[HTRN]

Call it what you want. We've all got to live with ourselves at the end of the day. Despite what I'm sure you think, none of us really knows for sure just how far he/she will go under the dire circumstances you seem to enjoy considering. Make your own choice.

I once got deployed to the kind of place this thread seems to want America to turn into. I've seen and smelled what happens when people forget they're humans and go on rampages. It's not something I'd want to be a part of. YMMV.

You are over thinking it. For now the government has the monopoly on collateral damage and is the properly licensed and legal terrorist.

Sure actions have consequences. Just as inaction does.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

I dunno. There are worse things than being dead, and being a terrorist is probably one of them. Blame the .gov all you wish; in the end, if you cause collateral damage, it's still you causing it. You, ultimately, have to choose whether to act like a decent human being or not. I do respect your views; I just find it tough to share them.

except being a terrorist or an insurgent is just a matter of perspective, i guarantee you the british would have labeled the colonists terrorists, think about it if the tea party happened today what do you think they would of been labeled? If someone straps on a vest and blows up a van of innocent civilians then yes thats a terrorist, it offers no strategic value other then the spreading of terror. The twin towers was a terrorist strike, the attack against the pentagon can be argued as something different since it was a military target. If things got so bad where open revolution had to be started then im sorry but people are gonna have to do evil things, things people will beg forgiveness for the rest of their lives. But thats something you cant avoid, if you play by the rules against an opponent who doesnt, YOUR GONNA LOSE.

- - - Updated - - -

Find me a video that is not butchered, and defines a "gun confiscation" not an "evacuation" manipulated into being a "gun confiscation".

I find it very funny that all you people are crying about a potential Gun Ban, when not one of u gave a crap about these peoples guns "supposidly" being "confiscated".

Bend over and take it again!

The news showed me a video saying Assault rifles are Evil, so they must be evil.

the courts issued a restraining order stopping it, what more proof do you need?

 

[Infinite Jester]

Call it what you want. We've all got to live with ourselves at the end of the day. Despite what I'm sure you think, none of us really knows for sure just how far he/she will go under the dire circumstances you seem to enjoy considering. Make your own choice.

I once got deployed to the kind of place this thread seems to want America to turn into. I've seen and smelled what happens when people forget they're humans and go on rampages. It's not something I'd want to be a part of. YMMV.

I don't think this thread wants America to turn into anything other than it was when the BOR was ratified. Just leave us the hell alone, don't infringe on our rights, and we can continue to live the lives our forefathers have. No harm, no foul. Very few here want to get violent, but faced with the possibility of tyranny, well, all bets might be off.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

I don't think this thread wants America to turn into anything other than it was when the BOR was ratified. Just leave us the hell alone, don't infringe on our rights, and we can continue to live the lives our forefathers have. No harm, no foul. Very few here want to get violent, but faced with the possibility of tyranny, well, all bets might be off.

exactly

 

[Terminator03]

except being a terrorist or an insurgent is just a matter of perspective, i guarantee you the british would have labeled the colonists terrorists, think about it if the tea party happened today what do you think they would of been labeled? If someone straps on a vest and blows up a van of innocent civilians then yes thats a terrorist, it offers no strategic value other then the spreading of terror. The twin towers was a terrorist strike, the attack against the pentagon can be argued as something different since it was a military target. If things got so bad where open revolution had to be started then im sorry but people are gonna have to do evil things, things people will beg forgiveness for the rest of their lives. But thats something you cant avoid, if you play by the rules against an opponent who doesnt, YOUR GONNA LOSE.

- - - Updated - - -



the courts issued a restraining order stopping it, what more proof do you need?

Very well said, and to the points I was trying to make.

 

[GunGrey]

 

[Terminator03]

I don't think this thread wants America to turn into anything other than it was when the BOR was ratified. Just leave us the hell alone, don't infringe on our rights, and we can continue to live the lives our forefathers have. No harm, no foul. Very few here want to get violent, but faced with the possibility of tyranny, well, all bets might be off.

exactly

Yep!

 

[Infinite Jester]

except being a terrorist or an insurgent is just a matter of perspective, i guarantee you the british would have labeled the colonists terrorists, think about it if the tea party happened today what do you think they would of been labeled? If someone straps on a vest and blows up a van of innocent civilians then yes thats a terrorist, it offers no strategic value other then the spreading of terror. The twin towers was a terrorist strike, the attack against the pentagon can be argued as something different since it was a military target. If things got so bad where open revolution had to be started then im sorry but people are gonna have to do evil things, things people will beg forgiveness for the rest of their lives. But thats something you cant avoid, if you play by the rules against an opponent who doesnt, YOUR GONNA LOSE.

- - - Updated - - -



the courts issued a restraining order stopping it, what more proof do you need?

There's actually footage of a FEMA "official" lecturing some LEOs on how George Washington was a terrorist, an insurgent. Sounds inflammatory, but in actuality, it's true. He was. And good for him.

 

[soloman02]

Here's my take on this...
A rebellion will fail. As soon as you join the cause, you will be considered a domestic terrorist. I don't trust the cops to pick our side. A disarmed population is a cop's dream come true. They would be the only ones on the street with guns (well, exept for the criminals who don't care about a rebellion or laws). As soon as it is known who is participating in this little uprise, your picture will be all over the news. I trust the media to pin pretty much everything that goes wrong with the country from then on on your sorry ass. Your support network will shrink like a yoghurt in the sahara desert. The feds will be after you, with everything they have. They have unlimited supplies, the newest technology, you have a problem finding 5.56 and food. Face it, if you want a rebellion, you have to be prepared to be the bad guy, and nobody likes a bad guy.
Do you really believe that the coppers will side with you? Give up their pension, their job, their life? Even IF you get 10 people together to form a small unit, how will you feed, shelter, heal and supplu them with things as simple as toilet paper or cigarettes? Your only option would be to seek help from the only people you really don't want to be seen with. Terrorist organisations, criminals, or nations that want nothing more then to see the US fall. Get in bed with them would make you just as evil and bad as them.
Conclusion: when you have nothing but a small group with small weapons, you shouldn't f@gg with people who can call in an airstrike in a matter of minutes. They will just starve you out, and then it's going to be Guantanamo, with no lawyer, no rights, no freedom at all. Just ask yourself, when was the last time you've heard from the people who are kept in that place?

We already have documented historical evidence that you don't need to terrorize civilians to win a shooting war (in fact, I can't think of a single instance in modern history where that worked). Look at the revolution in 1776. We didn't attack civilian targets. We used guerrilla tactics against British Military targets, and made sure to use rifleman (AKA snipers) to take out the command structure on the battlefield. The Brits were the ones who tried to terrorize the civilians. It only drove more to our side.

This is exactly how the third American Revolution (What you thought the Civil War wasn't a revolution?) must be fought. Should it come down to it, and that dark day comes, we must let the USG make the terrorist actions against civilians. If they don't do it at first, they certainly will once the guerrilla war heats up.

 

[Picton]

We already have documented historical evidence that you don't need to terrorize civilians to win a shooting war (in fact, I can't think of a single instance in modern history where that worked). Look at the revolution in 1776. We didn't attack civilian targets. We used guerrilla tactics against British Military targets, and made sure to use rifleman (AKA snipers) to take out the command structure on the battlefield. The Brits were the ones who tried to terrorize the civilians. It only drove more to our side.

I agree with your main point, but I think the loyalists throughout the Colonies who saw their homes burned and their families tarred-and-feathered might disagree with this take on things. Certainly Sullivan's slash-and-burn campaign against the Iroquois attacked noncombatants, and proudly.

Generally, though, you're right. Look at Hezbollah; they're very careful to keep the people on their side. They do this by undermining the government, providing food and medical care and so on. Whenever they actually attack the government, their cells get decapitated. I'm sure history will show which tactic will work. If Hezbollah wins, then perhaps GOAL should start building public schools, low-cost housing, and subsidized supermarkets. Just watch how fast the sheeple will turn on their government then.

I'm only half-kidding.

 

[CosmicIrony]

If anything bad ever truly happened, we'd all be f**ked. It does not matter how many guns or how much food you have--you'd still be f**ked. We'd all be f**ked. Because human beings are social creatures and we all need a functioning society to survive and thrive.

Think how fast society would fall apart if food supplies were interrupted for a few weeks. We need to make this government work, we can't afford for it to fail. That's one reason I am fed up with Washington - they would rather play stupid games.

 

[exo]

Think how fast society would fall apart if food supplies were interrupted for a few weeks. We need to make this government work, we can't afford for it to fail. That's one reason I am fed up with Washington - they would rather play stupid games.

I had read somewhere (no, don't remember where - but it sounds right) that grocery stores have ~3 days of supplies. The "just in time" economy keeps costs down, but is very vulnerable to disruption.

 

[namedpipes]

I had read somewhere (no, don't remember where - but it sounds right) that grocery stores have ~3 days of supplies. The "just in time" economy keeps costs down, but is very vulnerable to disruption.

And if you think that fact has gone unnoticed overseas...

I haven't tried to estimate exactly how long my food supplies would last, but as a ballpark I have so far got 6 mos to a year stored (thanks to the LDS cannery trips). Rice and beans, bread and pasta might get "old" after a while, but this is much better than the alternative of not eating.