What gunner in the US has the balls to stare down a tank like that guy in Tienanmen Square?

[upaloopa]

To fight for a cause means to be willing to die for a cause. Lot's of bad ass talking from the right but I doubt they are willing to back it up.

[GoneOffShore]

1. Have you got some butter for this?

[krispos42]

2. Do you anticipate Obama ordering tanks out on Americans? n/t

[upaloopa]

5. No but I'm reading some stuff from the right about how they are going to fight an armed rebelion

over their gun rights. I'm pointing out that they don't have the stuff to fight an armed rebellion and therefore there will never be tanks in the streets.

[krispos42]

8. They have the stuff; that's not the point.

There is not going to be an armed rebellion. There are not going to be US soldiers and Marines on the streets. There will be not tank, no artillery, no armored personnel carriers, no fighters or bombers or attack helicopters.

[upaloopa]

10. Have what stuff? Guns? Does Waco ring a bell?

[krispos42]

15. That wasn't an armed rebellion; that was a hostage situation.

Armed rebellions requires lots of people over lots of square miles.


Now, it MIGHT have sparked an armed rebellion, but it didn't. Pretty much the entire country didn't care about a child-abusing religious cult with a stockpile of illegal guns getting breached by the Feds after 4 ATF agents were killed. Nobody rose up with guns, or even with signs. OWS generated far more action and spread far more widely than "taking on the Feds" after Waco.

Later on, there were questions about the manner of the raid and the enormous death toll (particularly children), but that just sparked a Congressional investigation and the usual legal actions in the courts.

[Lizzie Poppet]

22. Precisely.

In an actual case of widespread insurrection - not a compound full of cultists or a handful of nutcases in the hills - do some people really think there wouldn't be tanks* on both sides? Really?

* and mortars, and anti-tank weapons, and whatever other military-grade hardware that was able to remain operational after the fragmentation of the military screwed the logistics system...

[MightyMopar]

24. Drones and robots will be sufficient when the time comes

Stuxnet type viruses will be sufficient to shut down any off the reservation US military hardware.

[friendly_iconoclast]

26. It'll be over before Christmas, amirite?

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. What makes you think all the military will remain loyal to the central government?

[Octafish]

3. Braver than Brave. Here's the Big Picture from that day...

More guts than a full clip kind of guy.

[earthside]

4. Good question.

And the answer is ... hardly any of them.

Owning lots of guns, especially military-style weapons, and lots of ammunition is about indulging 'Batman' fantasies about being a hero and saving damsels in distress. ("If I had been in that theater, I would have taken out that killer!&quot

Or the 'Red Dawn' fantasy that they will become the guerrilla fighters defending the nation from the invading Cubans.

Or the Waco, Ruby Ridge fantasy of taking on the tyrannical government (although they pretend it will come out differently than those two events).

Most of these gun fetishists are harmless ... I mean really harmless. It is their lack of masculine identity that compels them to compensate by being owners of fifteen, twenty, thirty guns.

So, would most of these folks stand in front of a tank to defend or fight for real freedom?
Are you kidding?
They'd be at home in their dark rooms in front of a computer posting tough guy images on Facebook.

[Aristus]

6. I agree. Anyone who poses with Santa while brandishing a gun for the Christmas card photo

probably doesn't have the stones to do something as bad-ass as standing in front of tanks - unarmed.

The Delicate Flowers are seriously reality-challenged...

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

20. Good answer, and we can prove it. Americans have effectively already been neutered. Their

constitutional rights, which are those that were granted them to protect them from tyranny and slavery have already been taken. I saw no one protecting themselves or defending their country.

It started with Bush reversing the posse comitatus act which allowed for troops to be used on American soil against American citizens in case they ever did decide to stand up to tyranny. It was followed by the patriot act (also Bush - illegal spying on Americans.) That was followed and even one upped by Obama's NDAA allowing arrest and detention of Americans on American soil for life, without a trial or any notification of the event occurring. Now we see it's also legal for Americans to be murdered by drones. There's also the illegal wars and the taxation without representation which is paying for them.

No one made a sound.

There are many here who believe the constitution is outdated anyway, so the above examples are fine by them. A military police force in America spying on them, with no right to a trial will somehow make them safer. But the other 50 percent of the country felt strongly about keeping the constitution as a form of protection for their children and grandchildren, and even that 50 percent with all their guns did nothing to protect it.

So yes, the gun argument regarding protection from illegal spying, the military killing American citizens with no trial, indefinite detention of Americans with no charges, is a total and complete FAIL. All of these things were already accomplished while 50 percent were boasting about how big and bad they were with their guns, and the other 50 percent were watching sports and celebrities and really didn't give a damn anyway.

At this point the whole thing is a joke.

[Mojorabbit]

25. I agree

and most of the population are ready to hand the rest of their rights over without any protest. Someone on this board was posting last week how they had no problem with the government spying on them cause they had nothing to hide. It really alarms me.

[JohnnyBoots]

7. Why would someone do that?

It is pretty bad strategy for asymmetrical warfare.

[Dash87]

9. They would need to be hardened first in our Liberal FEMA camps.

[CrispyQ]

11. If they were genuinely concerned about freedom

they would focus their energy on our 4th Amendment rights than our 2nd. Those are the ones truly under fire.

[PeaceNikki]

12. Do you understand that "has the balls" is a sexist expression?

It implies that one needs "balls" to be tough and/or brave. Please grow up and find a new expression.

[upaloopa]

14. No! You quit trying to mold the world in your image a likeness!

[Rex]

18. Well it is, but you go on with your crude self!

Why you want to compare acts of cowardliness, to an act of heroism is beyond me.

[upaloopa]

29. I don't think I'll let you define me.

You don't know a thing about me nor do you know anything about the rest of the people you attack based on your view of life. What you do makes you as much an ass as the people you criticize.
What is it with people like you that you have to spend you time harassing other people out of the blue?
Your a bully don't you know that?

[snooper2]

33. Your a bully don't you know that? , should have been written

"You're a bully don't you know that"...


Always try to help out when I can!

[RandiFan1290]

13. National Guard and police rounded up guns after Katrina

No one was fighting them as they went door to door.

[MrScorpio]

16. There's a little false equivalency here

There really is no comparison between how Americans view our military and how the Chinese people look at the People's Army of China.

This is the main reason why the Tienanmen Massacre was so outrageous and unique in Chinese history. Nothing like this has ever happened before. The US Army has a long history of being used against the people of this country, putting down riots, Repression of Native Americans and so on.

Although the Chinese did engage in past repression against its own people, until Tienanamen, it never used the People's Army.

When you're looking at that lone Chinese man stand in front of that column of tanks, what you're not seeing is the long history of the relationship between the Chinese Army and its people standing with him. Clearly what he was doing telling the Army what they were doing was wrong and against its own people.

American don't have an equivalent relationship with our army. Sure, a lot of Americans "Stand with the troops", but everyone in this country is always scared that the Government and, in part, the military can be turned in an instant into a repressive occupying force. The Chinese had never known that before with its army.

The Chinese would never think to take up arms against the People's Army, unlike some armed yahoo here in the US against the US Army.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

[datasuspect]

17. what internut nutter

has the zaniest confabulation of hyperbole imaginable?

i will give $500 to the winner.

[Rex]

19. LOL!

Is that in US dollars?

[datasuspect]

21. CDN

[MightyMopar]

23. Most if the one's I know are scared to drive inside the 285 perimeter in Metro Atlanta

Some one might gay marry them or something

[stumpremover462]

28. Don't be so silly :-)

The United States military will not fight against the Constitution of the United States, but will fight to protect it. Haven't you silly dilly's seen the oath they take? Here it is, it is the one my boyfriend took.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. That I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

He told me it does not mean he has to defend the physical country or the citizens of it, just the Constitution of the United States.

[Bake]

30. This entire thread is just flame bait and insulting.

OP ought to be ashamed. But then that's par for the course in DU lately.

Bake

[lunatica]

31. The size of this country alone precludes any widespread rebellion

It could only happen in pockets around the country and that in itself would give the government the advantage anyway. Now put in the weapons the US police and military have and you've got a pathetic rebellion at best.

Or the government could just keep them isolated and basically ignore them otherwise.

I have no plans whatsoever to be part of any insurrection or armed rebellion. I prefer to use my voice and my vote when I disagree with my government.

[The Straight Story]

32. So you are one of those religious wackos who believe guns have magic powers

"If a person has a gun suddenly they become cowards!"

"Guns make you kill people!"

How many fellow US citizens have used guns to defend this country and stood up to tanks/etc?

So if guns magically make people cowards then what does it make our folks in the military?

The stupid on DU at times when it comes to guns....