> Except that, if you're at this stage, you have failed. The whole freaking point of having a military is to not let it happen. So the US military instead trains its soldiers to fly bombers and read satellite photos, because these are the skills that make you win wars before it runs you over.
Eh, not so much. I believe the term is "defense in depth." There's also the saying "don't put all your eggs in one basket."
If recent history has taught us anything, it's that a territory with a hostile armed population is extremely difficult for even the most advanced army in the world to hold. The US (or the Soviets) would have won in Afghanistan if all the Taliban was able to do was stage protest marches and write angry letters.
Also, you have to understand that there are many different scenarios to consider. For instance: someday, the enemy may be the US military itself.
with tanks, nukes, helicopters, and actual soldiers with automatic weapons and grenades.
It's delusional to think that you will do anything other than piss yourself if the US military "knocks" on your door. At best you will die by grenade, at worst - turned into a pancake by some tank.
How do you picture yourself winning against the strongest military in the world, with your rifle at home? Do you really think you'll join a militia, shoot at US soldiers and survive to tell the story of how you bravely defended your freedoms against a tyrannical government?
This isn't a movie where you die a hero. The ship where citizens can defend themselves with weapons against a tyrannical government has sailed a very long time ago.
> For instance: someday, the enemy may be the US military itself.
That's exactly what I mean when I say "if you let it happen then you have already failed to defend your freedom." The US military is not a band of invaders, it's made of your fellow Americans. What were you doing while it turned into your enemy?
> "What were you doing while it turned into your enemy?"
netflix and facebook apparently. my whole lifetime has been a slow-motion monopolization of power and money, and we've yet to resist/deter/reroute any of it meaningfully. power has been slowly turning against the populace, and we're not paying any attention to it. rather, we're debating distracting culture topics like abortion, racism, and even covid mandates.
This is the kind of mindset that, in a country with a lot of guns, could lead people to start taking up arms against a government that most of the population doesn't want to overthrow, a population that largely thinks here-and-now topics like abortion or the everyday effects of racism or the public health effects of COVID are more important than ideological claims about how the country is now more "against the populace" than it supposedly was 50, 100, etc, years ago.
This is not a good thing. Are you really suggesting you might use a gun to force your fellow citizens to care about the same aspects of government that you do, instead of the ones they're currently focused on? When convincing your fellow voters and elected officials fail, you believe you have a right to resort to violence?
well yes, just as humans have for our whole history. but you’ve framed it as a false dichotomy, that i mean we must revolt at any slight, but that’s a disingenuous framing. it should be a last resort, just as our government should resort last to force, whether internally or externally.
> What were you doing while it turned into your enemy?
You seem to be assuming that someone could have done something and been successful, which I think is assuming too much.
But like I said before: the key point is defense in depth. It's stupid to put all your eggs in one basket for something so important. Conventional democratic process and personal firearms are both baskets in the analogy.
Eh, not so much. I believe the term is "defense in depth." There's also the saying "don't put all your eggs in one basket."
If recent history has taught us anything, it's that a territory with a hostile armed population is extremely difficult for even the most advanced army in the world to hold. The US (or the Soviets) would have won in Afghanistan if all the Taliban was able to do was stage protest marches and write angry letters.
Also, you have to understand that there are many different scenarios to consider. For instance: someday, the enemy may be the US military itself.