A Government Takeover??? Really People?

[wellendowed1911]

Ok- now let me say this- been seeing a lot of remarks recently- mainly coming from the Right about how Americans should be allowed to bear arms and that if our guns are taken away we could end up like Germany or Iraq- supposedly both those respective countries didn't allow citizens to own guns -which lead to dictators.
Now I am going to be fair and say that I have heard absurd conspiracies from the left when Bush was in office- everything that Bush wanted to take away our Freedoms(Patriot Act)- disarm citizens and there was even a conspiracy going around that Bush was going to pass try to get Congress to pass a law or have the constitution change where a President could run unlimited times and thereby he would "steal" the election again and began the New World Order- I am not making this up- it was out there during Bush's term.

Now getting back to the Government takeover- can someone tell me how the hell the U.S could possibly pull this off?
The U.S is perhaps the largest melting pot nation in the world. There has NEVER been a nation in history that had a dictator in which many of it's citizens came from various backgrounds.
The U.S military consists of people from every ethnic background- in order for a country to "takeover" you would have to have everyone or a great majority of the military on the same accord and with the ethnic makeup of the U.S military that's not going to happen. This is far different from Saddam who merely had to gather support from the Sunni sect and not allow anyone from the Shiite sect to join the military. Same situation with Hitler, North Korea and every other Dictator you can think of- normally Dictators are aligned with one group and they rule over another minority group.

So for anyone think that there's so great scheme that the U.S is trying to take away your freedom and guns- you truly are absurd- heck the congress can't even agree to pass a freaking bill and you think they can concoct some plan to take away peoples guns and control you?????

[CJ7]

snick


just finished watching a 1 hour special about the evolution of the AR 15 ... surprisingly there are quite a few morons that actually believe they can quell a government take over with a closet full of these guns and ammo, a bunker with food and water .... guess they forgot if the government actually wanted a combat war with these "patriots" they have tanks, F16's, bunker buster bombs, rocket launchers etc ..OH YEAH, DRONES TOO !!

China and Russia doesn't want get it on with this military force but Earl and Joe Billy do

[CuteOldGuy]

The Congress passed, and the President signed, the Patriot Act, NDAA, along with similar legislation.

Kinda blows your theory out of the water, doesn't it, WE?

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The Congress passed, and the President signed, the Patriot Act, NDAA, along with similar legislation.

Kinda blows your theory out of the water, doesn't it, WE?

COG- so how does this mean the GOVT wants to takeover? The Govt needs the military to takeover right? The U.S military has every ethnic group you can think- how would they get all those different races/religious to come together and take over? Wouldn't you agree for the most part that most soldiers in the military are not rich and are ordinary citizens? Show me another country that ever had a dictator where the military was multi-cultured or consisted of various religious/ethnic backgrounds? Iraq- nope- their military was ran by the Sunni's? Libya? Nope- same as Iraq- Sunni- controlled. Iran?- nope- Shiite controlled. The Taliban- nope- controlled by the Pashtun's. There has never been a dictator that controlled a vast melting pot like the U.S- it would be too difficult to get all those groups to agree to one common goal or mission.

[IIFFOFRDB]

I think all 3 of of y'all want to run over the USA with your vaginas.

You sluts...

[slim deez]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

COG- so how does this mean the GOVT wants to takeover? The Govt needs the military to takeover right? The U.S military has every ethnic group you can think- how would they get all those different races/religious to come together and take over? Wouldn't you agree for the most part that most soldiers in the military are not rich and are ordinary citizens? Show me another country that ever had a dictator where the military was multi-cultured or consisted of various religious/ethnic backgrounds? Iraq- nope- their military was ran by the Sunni's? Libya? Nope- same as Iraq- Sunni- controlled. Iran?- nope- Shiite controlled. The Taliban- nope- controlled by the Pashtun's. There has never been a dictator that controlled a vast melting pot like the U.S- it would be too difficult to get all those groups to agree to one common goal or mission.

The one common goal is called liberalism you idiot. It's happening in front of you right now.

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by slim deez

The one common goal is called liberalism you idiot. It's happening in front of you right now.

You are the bigger idiot- they have been saying this nonsense since Reagan's days- keep believing the bullshit Ale Jones is feeding you dimwit.

[chefnerd]

Hasn't this argument been going on since the Whiskey Rebellion under George Washington?

[Guest123018-4]

Much of the above is why I firmly believe that as a citizen I should be allowed to possess, as in keep and bear, whatever the government would use against me in violation of the Constitution.

The irony of it all is that the founding fathers understood that a standing army was prohibitively expensive and thus the only requirement under the Constitution was a navy. As long as the people are well armed, it would not be difficult to muster a force to stop an invasion.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The Congress passed, and the President signed, the Patriot Act, NDAA, along with similar legislation.

Kinda blows your theory out of the water, doesn't it, WE?

You are still free to spew your B S here

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Much of the above is why I firmly believe that as a citizen I should be allowed to possess, as in keep and bear, whatever the government would use against me in violation of the Constitution.

The irony of it all is that the founding fathers understood that a standing army was prohibitively expensive and thus the only requirement under the Constitution was a navy. As long as the people are well armed, it would not be difficult to muster a force to stop an invasion.

So do you believe citizens should be able to possess nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons?

I'm not asking this as an attack, but as a curiosity on how far your belief in the right to bear arms extends to.

[timpage]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Much of the above is why I firmly believe that as a citizen I should be allowed to possess, as in keep and bear, whatever the government would use against me in violation of the Constitution.

The irony of it all is that the founding fathers understood that a standing army was prohibitively expensive and thus the only requirement under the Constitution was a navy. As long as the people are well armed, it would not be difficult to muster a force to stop an invasion.

But, should you have to undergo a background check in order to purchase that TOW missile?

[Jewish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

COG- so how does this mean the GOVT wants to takeover? The Govt needs the military to takeover right? The U.S military has every ethnic group you can think- how would they get all those different races/religious to come together and take over? Wouldn't you agree for the most part that most soldiers in the military are not rich and are ordinary citizens? Show me another country that ever had a dictator where the military was multi-cultured or consisted of various religious/ethnic backgrounds? Iraq- nope- their military was ran by the Sunni's? Libya? Nope- same as Iraq- Sunni- controlled. Iran?- nope- Shiite controlled. The Taliban- nope- controlled by the Pashtun's. There has never been a dictator that controlled a vast melting pot like the U.S- it would be too difficult to get all those groups to agree to one common goal or mission.

Pretty good theory. It would be hard to incite a popular revolution because of the impediments you mention.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Ok- now let me say this- been seeing a lot of remarks recently- mainly coming from the Right about how Americans should be allowed to bear arms and that if our guns are taken away we could end up like Germany or Iraq- supposedly both those respective countries didn't allow citizens to own guns -which lead to dictators.
Now I am going to be fair and say that I have heard absurd conspiracies from the left when Bush was in office- everything that Bush wanted to take away our Freedoms(Patriot Act)- disarm citizens and there was even a conspiracy going around that Bush was going to pass try to get Congress to pass a law or have the constitution change where a President could run unlimited times and thereby he would "steal" the election again and began the New World Order- I am not making this up- it was out there during Bush's term.

Now getting back to the Government takeover- can someone tell me how the hell the U.S could possibly pull this off?
The U.S is perhaps the largest melting pot nation in the world. There has NEVER been a nation in history that had a dictator in which many of it's citizens came from various backgrounds.
The U.S military consists of people from every ethnic background- in order for a country to "takeover" you would have to have everyone or a great majority of the military on the same accord and with the ethnic makeup of the U.S military that's not going to happen. This is far different from Saddam who merely had to gather support from the Sunni sect and not allow anyone from the Shiite sect to join the military. Same situation with Hitler, North Korea and every other Dictator you can think of- normally Dictators are aligned with one group and they rule over another minority group.

So for anyone think that there's so great scheme that the U.S is trying to take away your freedom and guns- you truly are absurd- heck the congress can't even agree to pass a freaking bill and you think they can concoct some plan to take away peoples guns and control you?????

They called them "caesars," "emperors," "tsars," "khans," etc., and they were no less autocratic than dictators, and they only lacked the tools of the modern state to keep their subjects in absolute and universal bondage. The Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Russian Empire, the Mongolian Empire, etc., all had despotic rulers that ruled other vast regions encompassing multivarious races, languages, religions and ethnicities, and they actively sought to keep their subjects poor and disarmed.

[Whirlaway]

Why do you think it couldn't happen here is a better question; it seems to me the burden of proof is on you.....

The Constitution already guarantees my right, if you want to diminish those rights, make a cogent argument...other than laughing at the idea...

BTW, the argument that our army is a melting pot, therefore, military control couldn't happen is historically wrong; world history tells us so !