And? Not all gun owners are joining this joke military. The rest of us will be popcorning the show.
An awful lot would be happy to shoot back, in fact
It’s a waste of ammo and gas to get there.
Many gun owners are democrats, so their moronic stance against the U.S. fucking military is not off to a great start planning wise
The US did famously well against groups with just guns and IEDs.
That stint in the Middle East was a quick 20 min adventure.
Vietnam turned out to just be a tropical vacation.
There’s no Viet Cong in Texas. I don’t see Meal Team 6 dig tunnels in the thick Texan jungle.
Yes and no. We played that game by rules only we abided by.
Had we gone in and stayed without those rules, it would’ve been over within a year. But then we’d have committed a genocide and would be ruthless savages.
I feel that’s some hubris chief. Similar to Vietnam the military objective was met, but the reason for war, and so the victory conditions, are the political objective. We failed those. And breaking our rules does not de-motivate the insurgency or move us to the political objective. Let’s remember that one of those is a democracy and US ally in government in those countries.
The Soviets didn’t exactly hold back in Afghanistan…
Apples and oranges
72M? The fuq? Where is that number coming from? They can’t even get support from more than 15 (some of the least populated) states in the USA, and as a resident of one of those states they definitely aren’t unanimous for fucking Treason.
If anything, I better not catch those fuckers in the street or it’ll devolve into a real good guy with a gun dilemma.
Entire nations know better than to take on the US military, who have a larger budget than the next ten nations combined and won’t even give you a target to shoot at, and these dick weasels think they can do it with commercially available weapons and no training?
LMAO. Go ahead, try it. I’ll be here with popcorn.
Entire nations know better than to take on the US military
The US isn’t just a military stick, it’s also an economic carrot. The folks that end up wrangling with the stick are inevitably the ones denied the carrot.
Countries like Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and I guess now Yemen had been in an economic conflict with the US - via embargos and proxy wars - long before the first American soldier arrived.
The thing about Texas is that a handful of jerk-offs posting from their 8086s in Beaumont aren’t the guys who will feel the pain in a serious break away.
It’s Dell Computer and Exxon and fucking Pizza Hut that will hurt. And their executives will drag these dissidents out back to the wood shed themselves long before The Republic of Texas dipshits need to worry about a B-52 over their heads.
You might have a point here. Nowadays I can 100% see in my head, a little playfully maybe, corps coming for the kneecaps. This timeline so damned deranged it doesn’t seem farfetched atm.
Imagine Biden going on TV and announcing the nationalization of all assets owned by texas based companies.
Abbott’s head would be delivered to the white house the next day in a Halliburton duffle bag.
Stop it you are exciting me
Lockheed/Martin has MUCH faster planes than “next day”.
Idiot right-wing gun-lovers who actively support the kind of fascism we need to be fighting aside…
The idea isn’t to fight tanks and jets with rifles head-on. The idea is that an anonymous armed insurgency is really hard to defeat. Anti-armor vehicles work great against armor, but trying to use them on small insurgents made up of random individuals is like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer: you do a lot of collateral damage but the actual target is fine.
Overconfidence in stealth jets and aircraft carriers is why Iraq and Afghanistan turned into decades-long engagements before we’d just gave up and left. The regular Iraqi army was defeated in under 2 weeks, but we still lost the war.
And if it were to happen here, the government would also have to worry a lot more about troops unwilling to kill fellow citizens, unlike in the middle east where they were all strangers speaking a different language.
To be honest, we “lost” those wars because of our intolerance for splash damage. We often knew where the insurgents were, but to take them out would mean killing a lot of civilians. We had to wait until they were in a place where the collateral damage was minimal, even if it meant they got away. Israel and Russia don’t seem to have this problem, but look at where it’s landed them on the stage of world opinion.
People that believe in a “surgical” war are why we lose. We would have prevailed in an all out conflict where civilian casualties are acceptable. We have the firepower. But that might be viewed as genocide, which is unacceptable.
This is why the US is involved in so many conflicts. War is supposed to be terrible, and therefore avoided by all sides. When rules are in play, the weaker side believes they can win by hiding among civilians. This is the insurgents’ playbook - let the other side play by the rules, and when they don’t, scream foul. Never mind that combatants hiding among civilians is also against the rules.
Pure grade copium right here.
When you fight an insurgency with cruel force, especially with disregard for civilian casualties, all you do is further the circumstances that led to the insurgency in the first place. These groups are recruiting for a fight against a foreign army. If said army just brutally killed your innocent brothers and sisters, you are a hell of a lot more likely to get radicalized and join. It’s certainly no recipe for post-conflict stability.
This is what is so absurd about Israel’s war right now, and it was absurd about the US’ war too. And I disagree that the US would’ve “won” if it was “ok with more splash damage”.
What is your solution then? How do you deal with an opposing force that uses human shields?
Expose it, mock it, surgical strike which definitely can be possible. And sometimes, when the opposing force isn’t a threat to anyone but the human shields, yet the human shields support the opposing force, then you can just maybe give them that autonomy sometimes.
Unfortunately there are few cases where the group in question isn’t a threat. By your plan, the US should allow regions to secede if that is their wish. They won’t be a threat except to their own residents, who have shown their support by electing the officials seeking secession.
Finally someone else who realizes telling the military to carpet bomb cities has never worked against an insurgency except maybe in Chechnya, but it’s hard to call that an ideal win.
Do you really see the majority of Texans who want secession digging out trenches and caves and living in them, and providing all of their own food and supplies, though? The people of Afghanistan and Vietnam did not live comfortably in their homes with all the amenities while they were fighting their guerilla wars.
I don’t think Texans have anywhere near the same mental fortitude as those people. I see them giving up very quickly after living with no power in a cave somewhere.
Neither of us know what other people can or would do.
I know the kind of conditions that the people of Vietnam and Afghanistan were raised and survived in were many many times harder than the conditions that Texans have lived in their whole lives. You should too if you have paid attention to your education on world history.
Really not that hard to understand that people who grew up in third world countries are tougher than people that grew up in first world countries.
I don’t know that adversity makes people stronger. I know strong people who haven’t faced adversity, I’ve faced a little bit but remained weak. It’s a common mentality, but I just don’t have any reason to believe its true.
We can have a pretty damn good clue based on how they live and behave day-to-day.
The idea is that an anonymous armed insurgency is really hard to defeat.
The US army is very good at that. That’s the kind of conflict they’ve been fighting since Vietnam. If you think a distributed guerrilla army can stand against the US military on their own soil, you’re delusional.
I’m not talking about tanks and jets. That’s so last century. That’s not how wars are fought now. There’s just no way homegrown militias would have any hope against the US military in their midst. Ask anyone enlisted in any branch of the military. I promise they’ll tell you that’s a pipe dream.
You mean the military that’s consistently failed to win those kind of conflicts?
The US military was driven out of Iraq and Afghanistan and that’s with pretty much 100% troop loyalty. You start ordering the military to shoot Americans on American soil they won’t even have that.
In the US Civil War, this exact scenario played out. All it took was first blood, and even family members on opposite sides fought each other.
US soldiers will definitely kill our own. We saw this during the 70’s with National Guard units shooting Kent State students. We see it today with our police forces. If the opposition can be cast as the villain, soldiers will fight.
Sure, but the American army can (with the almost assured ok from Mexico) literally surround Texas and just starve them out. What exactly is going to get through the US Navy, Army, and Air Force into Texas if they don’t want it to? It’ll be a guerrilla army against the American Military that literally can fly any operation they want 30 seconds to and from target. The US has one of the most insanely good America’s logistical abilities in history, around the world, imagine inside their own borders. What exactly are Texas Militias going to do? Approach the borders and take pot shots? The second they try to get through a drone army flying 24/7 will either take them out themselves or constantly send locations to artillery, tanks, etc. All the AR-15/M16/M416/etc in the world won’t help you against what the American Military has on offer.
I think you’re missing the point that it wouldn’t be a war, it would be a police action. The local national guards would shut that shit down quickly.
If you think your small arms could stand against the US military on its own turf, you’re hilariously mistaken. I get that you want to believe that’s what gives you your freedoms, but come on. Nobody who actually understands how that would play out takes those dreams seriously.
You have guns because they fulfill your fantasies, not because that’s in any way realistic.
Objectively then, clearly 2A is deficient. The people need more arms to keep oppressive governments in check.
Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria. Insurgency is very different from peer/near peer. Not to mention in the event of a civil war, at least some amount of the military would side with them. And another portion would not want to bomb urban areas especially.
You take away their burgers and see the uprising collapse in days. These people are nothing like the Vietnamese, the Afghans, or the Syrians.
Every b52 is stationed in a red state. A lot of ignoring the details in here.
On land that the states don’t own, controlled by military staff that work for the feds. What is your point?
I disagree with the sentiment of the OOP, but this is and always had been a bad argument. Take a look at the Middle East if you want to see what aircraft does to guerilla militia forces. An AC130 can’t patrol streets or breach doors. You need boots on the ground for that, boots that are 100% susceptible to gunfire.
Not to mention the fact that the federal government has lost command of the CBP, who are openly defying Biden’s orders.
The enemy in the middle east is ready to live in a cave and use kids as suicide bombers to further their cause. I don’t think folks accustomed to Costco and buffalo wild wings and healthcare are ready for that life.
I love a little bit of racism mixed with social inaccuracy. You’re right that people wouldn’t want to go without Costco or modern luxuries. That’s why they’d fight even harder when the people in power told them that it was the evil federal government that had taken it from them and that if they just fight a little bit, things will be better than ever before. You’re forgetting how dangerous of a combo that authoritarian govt. + uneducated population (which describes Texas perfectly) is.
Also,
healthcare
What Texans are accustomed to healthcare already lol?
I’m not being racist at all. One of the strengths of the middle east insurgent model is their readiness to live in primitive conditions. And, due to fanatical religious ideals, use tactics line suicide bombing. There’s no evidence prospective texan secessionists are anywhere near ready for such conditions or tactics.
Many Texans have insurance. Many Afghan rural folks do not. Census.Gov states over 90% of Americans had some for of health insurance at least at some point in the last year. (It should be 100, all year, but that’s not my point.) https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2023/demo/p60-281.html#:~:text=Highlights,91.7 percent or 300.9 million).
The rest of your comment is comically unfounded. Are you really saying yallqueda is more prepared for combat than alqueda?
“I support the former things” is such a stupid fucking slogan. It’s not catchy and sounds like someone tried to rephrase “The good old times” five times in a row. How about:
“Back in the day today!”
“It has been better, it will be better!”
“We chug barrels of cum!”
“Craving for Russian cock uWu”
I swear, the right has zero creativity.
So… Every gun in the US is owned in Texas?
Not only that, every last one is apparently owned by people ready to die for Greg Abbot’s ego
No, every person who owns a gun is part of a hive mind that thinks exactly like the person who created this. Or so they think.
It’s amazing the people that deliberately avoid “CRT” topics and push defunding schools do not know the events ov Blair mountain, the bombing of MOVE in Philadelphia, and/or black wall street. Absolutely shocked!
I am confused about what cathode-ray tubes have to do with schools, Blair mountain, a bombing and black wall street…
Critical Race Theory
Bruh I’m a gun owner for sport, don’t lump me in with the stupid crowd. I don’t care if I couldn’t own guns anymore, I’d just find a different hobby. I’m sure as shit not coming to the rescue of Texas
How little the average redneck understands this joke… I’ll explain it like to a five year old:
72 bazillion guns are USELESS against one single B52 carpet bombing the shit out of you.
Modern Warfare makes a gun fight look like a cave men throwing stones.
Yes, but also you’re ignoring the reality of the resilience of insurgent forces to air power. You cannot win the war only from the air.
Good thing the most well funded military in the world, greater than the next 9 nations combined, is also at their beck and call. This isn’t the NVA, this is a bunch of 280 pound guys who practice shooting from benches, going against drones, artillery, bombers, tanks, missiles, etc.
The Texas Gravy Seals are going to have to leave their bunkers for burgers and beer eventually…and insulin.
One of the fattest countries in the world aren’t hardened fighters after years of various occupations. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq etc. is not comparable to the US and Texas
Equating gun ownership with sedition and secession is pretty stupid. Go for it, Texas. Your backup numbers are fewer than you think.
There was an article a few weeks ago about how Texas is the least-free state in the union. They have the fewest liberties, yet they can carry guns and that’s all they care about.
Equating gun ownership with sedition and secession is pretty stupid.
If the state of Texas ever went into serious revolt, the first thing it would need to do is flood the streets of Houston, Dallas, and Austin with military police to contain their own domestic insurrection.
Half those gun owners would happily Texas Book Depository Greg Abbott if he was ever in their line of fire.
i would like to add - not even all gun owners in texas are interested in opposing the feds in this case!
Would like to see what that rifle would do against a tank or an IFV.
So this dumbass thinks the entire population of American gun owners are coming to their rescue?
I’m willing to believe that large enough chunk of gun enthusiastics comes from Texas or Texas-like states.
“Everything’s bigger in texas” including the fear of gubmint
Remember Jade Helm, when the army held a training exercise in Texas and a bunch of yokels thought it was an invasion?
Unfortunately they couldn’t get there in time because their mobility scooters ran out of battery.
They’re in need of some mechanical bootstraps I see.
Hah!
Every gun owner I’ve talked to on the internet claims they do this to protect themselves from the US government. Every gun owner I’ve talked with on the internet doesn’t have an answer for when I discuss the massive firepower the US has in comparison to their pew pew sticks.
Every gun owner on the internet seems to be 100% on board with using their guns to install a fascist US government.
A simple scroll on this thread alone seems to indicate against this statement. Plenty of good non-fashy-non-tankies who understand the problems with disarmament of the people.
They’re just also not loud and obnoxious. =\
Look, I wouldn’t mind having a gun personally, I get that they’re fun, but societally speaking, I am very fucking happy basically nobody has them here. Theoretically.
If that works for your locale and you personally, that’s great. No argument. It’s a complicated topic for sure.
From a perspective here, unfortunately here in the U.S, they’re many times necessary for personal protection, especially out in the boonies, because the territory is just so dang BIG you simply can’t rely on a police service to protect you from skullduggery at all times. (And then, yeah, police are a contentious topic too lol…I digress)
My only nudge with your comment was “Every gun owner on the Internet seems…”
The vast majority of us are on the Internet, quiet, responsible, and really hope we’re never forced to sling lead at another human being, and we’re just as embarrassed as you are about the ones you’re talking about.
If anything, those types’ out of control posturing and dangerous toddler antics will end in screwing us all over once they’ve “othered” every single potential ally the responsible folks could have had.
I hope maybe in some way it can help you feel like the world is a little less crazy when people on “the other side of the issue” are all too happy to agree with you on how out of hand it’s all gotten.
I think a huge core of it is that arms companies need to stay in business by putting more product in exponentially more hands every quarter, and they’ll use every astroturfing, lobbying, culture-warping trick in the book to create a never-ending “gun fandom.”
That can’t be good for anybody.
Thanks for putting in the effort for a good reply.
I think the way I see it is this:
https://www.iflscience.com/an-artist-placed-goldfish-in-blenders-and-asked-visitors-to-turn-them-on-they-did-63638Briefly, artist put a live goldfish in a blender as an art exhibition, connects blender to a big red button for any attendee to press. If they want. They did.
The thought being, sooner or later, it doesn’t matter, given time, some bumfuck is going to press it. And they did. Plenty of people did (I think all the goldfish died, there were ten blenders like this, I think the artist even knew that 1 wouldn’t be enough and that 10 might perhaps drive the point home even more).
If you give people the option to select between life and death for someone else, people are going to die, a lot. It doesn’t matter that it was perhaps one in five hundred who pressed the button for whatever reason, the fish still got massacred.
You get what I’m saying?
Here’s your answer.
All the bombs, missiles, planes, and tanks are how the US got a decisive victory in Vietnam.
I think the people of Vietnam had a lot less fucks to give than your average Texan. I don’t see Texans building and living in an underground tunnel system that they themselves dug out. I dont even know how those idiots survive without a chick fil a within driving distance. Guerilla warfare involves some terrible living conditions for the guerilla fighters, and Yall Qaeda is not strong enough to live that way.
Were the Vietnamese fighters morbidly obese, middle-aged men with no training who wouldn’t even tolerate a paper mask to save their families?
And Afghanistan.
4 presidents, 20 years, and trillions of dollars, and we successfully replaced the Taliban with…the Taliban.
A perfectly bipartisan effort, too! A true symbol of what we can do if Republicans and Democrats work together
Aww, did you delete your reply? That’s not very big, brave gun owner of you. Thankfully, it still arrived in my inbox.
Washington DC area, 2002. Did two guys with a rifle paralyze a major metropolitan area?
While I’m all for people changing their deeply stupid beliefs, it’s still surreal that for at least a few minutes, you thought that a good argument was “Our guns will be all we need against an actual military because we can use them for domestic terrorism targeting pregnant white women”.
I reconsidered because I thought someone would misrepresent my meaning. Congrats.
If the shooting starts, it won’t be the old scooter patrol on the front lines on the Texas border. It will be a guerilla war and the targets won’t be pregnant women. People who lack critical thinking skills or haven’t studied history think bombs and tanks matter in that sort of war. Hurr durr, no one can stand up to the military. Lol
Leaving the union: All social security, Medicare, Medicaid disappear immediately. Who is fighting the U.S. Navy for the oil wells? All imports stopped. All exports stopped. The companies who drill the oil and lobby the politicians are going to choose to sell to the U.S. instead of a single entity that won’t be able to pay. Now there is no fuel for vehicles… workers aren’t at the power plants, electricity failing more often than already overloaded grid they failed to maintain. It’s 100+ degrees in Texas how often?
People dying, starving, traveling back in time… Do they still think they are better than the immigrants coming over to offer work and pay sales taxes?
Maybe brokering a deal to figure out immigration policies where they are processed cheaper, documented and turned into workers paid for by the the entire U.S. won’t sound so bad then… Maybe they will even think assisting other countries so the people don’t leave will be so bad either.
Agreed, it would be a fucking mess, particularly if some of the states that are supporting Texas join in secession. But if there isn’t a border, there isn’t a country. And 2 million a year is beyond sustainable, and with zero vetting is beyond stupid and beyond dangerous. Who is coming in? MS13, Hamas/ ISIS? Trafficked children? Or is every single one just looking for a better life.
We have immigration laws, and the Biden administration isn’t following them. They are in fact, actively ignoring/breaking them.
Why?
I always bring up resources management. They probably won’t go full hog in an armed uprising on US soil. Every bridge bombed is a bridge needed to rebuild. A carpet bombing of Texas will hit non-combatant citizens. A preemptive point against this would be the first civil war. Sherman’s march ( the goat ) was different because the largest militaries decided to be neutral during the conflict. A crippling of an armed uprising will also cripple defense against China or Russia if they get froggy. Or if the damages could be justified. Like say a critical bridge was one of the MANY bridges that are on the verge of collapsing. Bomb it now and make Texas pay for it call it Biden’s bridge etc. Or a track of land being used by rebels is prime railroad land/oil/etc.
Gun owner here: that’s a stupid mentality. Putting aside the fact that I rather like the federal government, the best you could hope for in a war against the feds is an indefinite insurgency. You’ll suffer an abismal casualty rate, and you’ll really only be able to “win” if you saturate the government with sympathizers. If that happens, well, “you” won’t be doing the winning, it’ll be the people who got themselves into established positions of power.
Well it kind of already happened. The Confederacy lost but their ideology somewhat retained and now a sizeable chunk of the elected government officials are sympathetic to it.
It’s a very stupid mentality born out of fear. I had a conversation with someone on reddit once in the comment section for a news article about a child (5 year old) finding a gun in the bushes. Her reply as a gun owner was “I’d rather live in a world where 5 year olds can find guns in bushes than live in a world where they cannot”.
It blows my mind. These folks are going to end up killing their children in a case of mistaken idenity if they’re not careful (and they aren’t careful).
I know someone whose son killed himself with a gun he found in Daddys night stand.
Daddy was a broken man afterwards and had to force himself raising his daughter until she had a job, a fiance and left the house. The next day Daddy shot himself with the same gun as his son.
Such a sad story. Dad wanted to be at the ready for a home invader which never came. Kid was too young to understand and/or a curious small human learning about the world. What’s worse is that stories like this get written off as “anti-gun / anti-2nd amendment propaganda”. The reason the person I was arguing with wanted to live in a world “where a kid can find a gun in the bush” was, as they explained: because any argument or statement that can be construed as for gun control is a threat to our right to bear arms - they would rather live in a world where we have so many guns that they are showing up in bushes where children can find them, than live in the only other option, which is a world in which no guns do not exist in any sense of the word.
It’s wild, really. Protecting yourself makes sense, but a world where guns are accessible to literal children is not a world most folks want to live in. And it’s the world americans live in.
Handle doesn’t check out lol. Your points are very well-reasoned. The saddest part for me is that education goes a LONG way with these things, but the issue is now so heavily politicized it’s hard to make any headway with anyone.
In school districts you’re often up against zero-tolerance hoplophobes and panic parents who are just plain terrified that guns exist (understandably), and would rather just pretend they didn’t instead of educating themselves and their kids. (Irrationally)
Then sometimes you have the ones wanting to teach these classes having some ulterior gun-worship political motive…
But for real:
We teach kids not to play around moving cars or trains or downed power lines, but having “If you find a gun…” safety talks with children doesn’t happen as often as it should, and they’re way smarter than we give them credit for.
I stash mine securely, and if my nephews saw me cleaning one they’d be curious and staring. I’d always kindly tell them like it was:
“This is a dangerous tool. This is a tool to defend from someone attempting to kill you. It can seriously hurt or kill people. This is not to be played with. What do you do if you EVER find something that looks like this?”
“Don’t touch it. Go tell an adult.”
“Good boys.”
They need to know they can trust the grownups in their lives to teach them instead of punish them for curiosity. Then these things stop being taboo and fascinating.
Finally you have owners who, as the tragic story said, just keep it in a nightstand. No lock or anything. Wow. Proper home security and an emergency preparedness plan with your family should buy you more than enough time to safely retrieve a securely stowed weapon to protect yourself from a very determined attacker.
The people who think they’ll just wake up one night and suddenly find themselves having to mag dump into a ninja make me sad.
Lol sorry for the rant.
Kids are way smarter than we give them credit for, absolutely! I’m the kind of guy who would rather not live in a world with guns, or violence for that matter. I’d be willing to ban lots of weapons for this purpose. I’m that guy who gun advocates hate to deal with in that respect. The only reason I’ve carved a small niche for “responsible gun ownership” is because my dad was very open about getting one. He told us he got it, he explained why, he took a firearms class, got a concealed carry permit, would clean maintain it regularly even though I’ve never seen him fire it. He told me stories about how gun owners would be too quick to react when hearing a home intruder and accedently shot a family member who was coming home late. He showed me how to hold the weapon, but that was about it. That small bit went a long way.
And Republicans have been demonstrating for decades now that saturating the government with sympathizers works just fine without an armed rebellion.
“What will your response be to an AGM-114 Hellfire missile?”
“Well I’ll shoot it of course.”
As a gun owner, guns are for hunting and defending against these drooling idiot, neo-nazi seditionists who are trying to forment civil war.
The other 95% of us gun owners, such as myself, who DON’T broadcast it to the world and make it our entire personality, have guns as a hobby or as tools to use on the farm. And give zero fucks about whatever the hell the feds or Texas is up to…
Wait, so you don’t buy whipped cream and take instagram photos with your pistol?
Obviously we do.
We just don’t post it.
That’s for private use.
Nope! The only photos I have of my guns are either records of the serial numbers and attachments for insurance value purposes, or of me and my friends together on range days once in a while.
Not even just a little whipped cream?
Nooe, sorry to disappoint. It’s bad for the mechanisms. Stickyyyy 🤮🤮
Sad uwu
Crazy. Almost like it’s just hollow self-aggrandizing so they can pretend they’re a hero.
