Quote:
Originally Posted by footfootfoot
The idea that citizens, armed with the type of weapons that citizens can afford and buy, could in any way defend themselves against the military and its very special weapons is fantastic.
The 2nd amendment was written in another time and world. ...
|
@piedpiedpied,
Well, the Afghanis must have some fantastic ideas since their culture has transcended invasions by the world's two major superpowers. You see, those who know unconventional warfare [UW], how it works and how it can be successful for those with patience also know that there is a minimum threshold of initial capability needed to give an insurgency a chance against all but the weakest of governments. That threshold is the private ownership of individual firearms and hasn't changed since the 2nd amendment was written. Those who have "been there, done that" recognize it while the been nowhere, done nothings can't. The majority of people fall into the latter category. That's why it takes a 2/3 vote in Congress rather than a simple majority to change it.
Conventional militaries do not fare well over the long haul against those using UW tactics ... not the Russians' ... not ours. That's why there are specialists in this area. For the US, it's Special Forces. They know how to develop an insurgency to overthrow a government even if you don't. That ability also makes them best qualified to conduct counterinsurgencies as seen in the heavy reliance on them in Afghanistan. The nature of the UW beast is; however, that even our best solution, human or technological, is still not the definitive solution to an insurgency ... not foreign ... not domestic.
None of the above matters to those with defeatist attitudes and those who would rather just go with the flow as long as they themselves remain minimally comfortable. There are; however, still those of us who don't want to live in France.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet
Killing another human being does not set you free.
|
Of course it can, it's just not the preferred method.