All that is true Frank, however I doubt that his battle threats are indictable, I'm no lawyer so I don't know. By cloaking himself in the time worn rhetoric of the American Revolution he tries to further his fantasy. Hell he even borrowed Churchill's "blood, sweat and tears.

The point I'm making in the post above is the unreality of the situation he envisions. No amount of privately owned arsenals would be sufficient to engage the US military. Oh and our revolution was against a foreign occupation, not a domestic government. If he and others want to wave the tattered flag of the past fine. But to even hint at a domestic overthrow of an elected world power government may or may not be treasonous, but it certainly is impractical and ludicrous.

Well Sailorman you've been calling for a revolution in case Hillary wins the election. So, as a former military man I think you know the odds of success are less than slim. If you wage war against the US govt. you will have to defeat their military. You will be the new *minutemen" for sure because that is how long you will last.

I for one, am not convinced that a revolution in the US would mean that you would need to defeat the military. In fact, most military and veterans of the military despise Obama, Billary and their crew. And if the military were to go against a revolutionary force, it would be anything but a sure thing that they would prevail. If the politicians ran the war, my bet would be with the revolutionary force. Just think of it in the terms of Vietnam. The politicians could not defeat an obviously inferior and outgunned force in a country with less than 350,000 square miles, a little smaller than California.... USA is over 10 times larger than Vietnam. Then factor in that currently the US standing military force is about 1.3 million. There are 19.3 million military veterans in the US. A high percentage of that group is not only trained in a wide variety of Military Occupations, but feel strongly that we will retain our constitutional rights. Possibly 5 million trained in or were involved in combat situations. Then consider 359 million firearms in private hands in the US. And those that are motivated to defend our constitutional rights are vast holders of these weapons. Add to that force 'many millions of good old country boys and girls that value their gun ownership rights and respect our veterans. Just my take....

Double post. Removed

You're entitled to your dream. I also speak as a veteran.

steelyRon wrote:Well Sailorman you've been calling for a revolution in case Hillary wins the election. So, as a former military man I think you know the odds of success are less than slim. If you wage war against the US govt. you will have to defeat their military. You will be the new *minutemen" for sure because that is how long you will last.

I for one, am not convinced that a revolution in the US would mean that you would need to defeat the military. In fact, most military and veterans of the military despise Obama, Billary and their crew. And if the military were to go against a revolutionary force, it would be anything but a sure thing that they would prevail. If the politicians ran the war, my bet would be with the revolutionary force. Just think of it in the terms of Vietnam. The politicians could not defeat an obviously inferior and outgunned force in a country with less than 350,000 square miles, a little smaller than California.... USA is over 10 times larger than Vietnam. Then factor in that currently the US standing military force is about 1.3 million. There are 19.3 million military veterans in the US. A high percentage of that group is not only trained in a wide variety of Military Occupations, but feel strongly that we will retain our constitutional rights. Possibly 5 million trained in or were involved in combat situations. Then consider 359 million firearms in private hands in the US. And those that are motivated to defend our constitutional rights are vast holders of these weapons. Add to that force 'many millions of good old country boys and girls that value their gun ownership rights and respect our veterans. Just my take....

Those numbers sound great accurate or not. One or more relevant points. No big guns, no air force, no navy, no marines, no subs, aircraft carriers, missles etc, etc,& no a cohesion. Plus many vets are advanced in age & many infirm. A rag tag army at best.

Best case scenario (not that I am an advocate) would be guerrilla warfare in the streets.
Might look like a Fallujah, Allepo, or a plethora of other mid-east cities. Not pretty.

And what will you replace the kleptocracy with? Some other distorted BS? As fuked up as it is I'll take it over civil war.

"Those numbers sound great accurate or not. One or more relevant points. No big guns, no air force, no navy, no marines, no subs, aircraft carriers, missles etc, etc,& no a cohesion. Plus many vets are advanced in age & many infirm. A rag tag army at best."

All good points to which I would add financial backing and training as a cohesive unit. Add logistics to the picture and you have a deficit that political indoctrination will never overcome. And I seriously doubt that "those good old country boys and girls" could provide military hardware of sufficient caliber to take out a tank or down an airplane. A very sad fantasyland some political posters dwell in.

mahatma gandhi's troops defeated the greatest military on earth without firing a shot
look at how quick they ran marcos and suharto out when they realised the strength of their own numbers.
shooting does not work very well.

The average American is too busy eating pizza and playing video games, to start a revolution.

I was in a bar a few nights ago and an american came in and put on "America Fuck Yeah" song and started singing along *facepalm!!*

Why am I tempted to google that song. Maybe you need to upgrade your hangouts Jamie.